Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, defendants in a commercial suit filed by Pyrotek India Private Limited, challenged the order of the learned District Judge (Commercial Division), Pune, dated 28/01/2021, which rejected their application to file a written statement beyond the 120-day period prescribed under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. The suit was instituted in January 2020 seeking injunction and restraint against use of trade secrets. The defendants received summons on 10/01/2020 and were granted extensions to file written statement, with the final extended date being 24/03/2020. However, due to the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic and the nationwide lockdown declared from 25/03/2020, the courts in Pune functioned only for extremely urgent matters, and the defendants could not file the written statement within the extended period, which expired on 09/05/2020. They filed an application on 02/07/2020 seeking permission to bring the written statement on record, which was opposed by the plaintiff on the ground of delay. The trial court rejected the application, holding that the defendants failed to show sufficient cause. The High Court, in its judgment, held that the COVID-19 pandemic and the resultant lockdown constituted an extraordinary event beyond the control of the defendants, and the trial court ought to have exercised its discretion liberally to allow the written statement to be taken on record. The Court emphasized that the delay was not intentional and no prejudice was caused to the plaintiff. The impugned order was set aside, and the written statement was directed to be taken on record, subject to payment of costs of Rs. 10,000 to the plaintiff.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Commercial Suit - Written Statement - Extension of Time - Order VIII Rule 1 CPC, Section 16 Commercial Courts Act, 2015 - The issue was whether the COVID-19 pandemic and resultant lockdown constituted sufficient cause for condoning delay in filing written statement beyond 120 days in a commercial suit. The Court held that the pandemic was an extraordinary event beyond the control of the defendants, and the trial court ought to have exercised discretion liberally to allow the written statement to be taken on record, as the delay was not intentional and no prejudice was caused to the plaintiff. (Paras 1-11) B) Civil Procedure - Limitation - Force Majeure - COVID-19 Pandemic - Order VIII Rule 1 CPC - The Court considered the impact of the nationwide lockdown declared from 25/03/2020, which prevented the defendants from filing the written statement within the extended period ending on 09/05/2020. The Court held that the lockdown constituted a force majeure event and the defendants had shown sufficient cause for the delay, and the trial court's rejection of the application was erroneous. (Paras 4-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the delay in filing the written statement beyond 120 days in a commercial suit can be condoned on the ground of the COVID-19 pandemic constituting sufficient cause under Order VIII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 read with Section 16 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the impugned order dated 28/01/2021, and directed that the written statement be taken on record subject to payment of costs of Rs. 10,000 to the plaintiff.
Law Points
- Order VIII Rule 1 CPC
- Section 16 of Commercial Courts Act
- 2015
- Sufficient cause for extension of time
- COVID-19 pandemic as force majeure
- Liberal approach in procedural matters
