Case Note & Summary
The appellants, Dr. Ramachandra C and Dr. Pallavi V R, filed a commercial suit (COM.O.S.No.164/2021) before the 89th Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, against Karnataka Bank Limited and its branches. The suit pertained to a loan dispute. The trial court, by order dated 02/09/2021 on I.A. No.1, returned the plaint under Order 7 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC), on the ground that the suit was undervalued and beyond its pecuniary jurisdiction. Aggrieved by the order of return of plaint, the appellants filed a commercial appeal under Section 13(1A) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 read with Order 41 Rule 1 CPC before the High Court of Karnataka. The High Court heard the learned senior counsel for the appellants and the counsel for the respondents. The court observed that the appeal involved a very short point and was taken up for disposal at the admission stage with the consent of counsels. The High Court held that the trial court erred in returning the plaint without first giving the plaintiff an opportunity to revalue the suit and pay the requisite court fee. The court set aside the order of return of plaint and restored the suit to the file of the trial court, directing the trial court to proceed with the suit in accordance with law. The appeal was allowed accordingly.
Headnote
A) Commercial Law - Pecuniary Jurisdiction - Return of Plaint - Section 13(1A) of Commercial Courts Act, 2015 r/w Order 41 Rule 1 CPC - The trial court returned the plaint in a commercial suit on the ground that the suit was undervalued and beyond its pecuniary jurisdiction. The High Court held that the trial court ought to have given an opportunity to the plaintiff to revalue the suit and pay the requisite court fee before ordering return of plaint. The order of return of plaint was set aside and the suit was restored to the file of the trial court. (Paras 2-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the trial court was justified in returning the plaint under Order 7 Rule 10 of CPC on the ground of lack of pecuniary jurisdiction without properly considering the valuation of the suit as per the Commercial Courts Act, 2015.
Final Decision
The appeal is allowed. The order dated 02/09/2021 passed by the 89th Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-90) in COM.O.S.No.164/2021, insofar as it directs return of plaint, is set aside. The suit is restored to the file of the trial court. The trial court is directed to proceed with the suit in accordance with law.
Law Points
- Pecuniary jurisdiction
- Return of plaint
- Commercial Courts Act
- 2015
- Order 7 Rule 10 CPC
- Valuation of suit
