Ex Parte Order Recall Can't Revive Right To File Written Statement After 120 Days: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court has held that setting aside an ex parte order in a commercial suit does not revive a defendant's right to file a written statement after the expiry of the mandatory 120-day deadline under the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908. Justice Easwaran S dismissed a petition filed by Anwar Basheer and Basheer challenging the Commercial Court, Thiruvananthapuram's refusal to accept their belated written statement in a commercial suit filed by Abaan Impex Private Limited. The Bench...

Bombay High Court Restrains Ex-Clippings CEO Vinayak Shrivastav From Dealing With Assets In ₹222 Crore Suit

The Bombay High Court has directed Vinayak Shrivastav, former CEO, co-founder, and largest shareholder of US-incorporated Clippings LLC, and seven others, comprising his family members and entities owned or controlled by him or his family, to disclose their assets and financial affairs within 10 days. The court also restrained them from dealing with their assets in a suit alleging that ₹222.62 crore belonging to Clippings and its Indian subsidiary was diverted.Justice Arif S. Doctor held that...

Bombay High Court Rejects Meta's Plea To Return Blink Digital's ₹1,000 Crore Suit

The Bombay High Court on Tuesday rejected Meta Platforms Inc.'s plea to return a ₹1,000 crore commercial suit filed by digital advertising agency Blink Digital (India) Private Limited over the disabling of its business accounts. The court held that Meta had failed to establish that the Bombay High Court totally lacked territorial jurisdiction to hear the dispute.Justice Sandeep V. Marne observed that the suit raised allegations of violations of the Information Technology Act, 2000, and the...

Delhi High Court Rejects NDMC Plea To Dismiss Taj Mahal Hotel Operator's ₹38.35 Crore COVID-19 Licence Fee Suit

The Delhi High Court has rejected the New Delhi Municipal Council's (NDMC) plea to dismiss a suit filed by Indian Hotels Company Limited (IHCL), which operates the Taj Mahal Hotel in New Delhi. The company is seeking exemption from ₹38.35 crore in licence fees for the COVID-19 pandemic period and an extension of the licence by 272 days.Justice Subramonium Prasad was hearing NDMC's application to dismiss the suit, which seeks relief under the force majeure clause of the leave and licence...

Delhi High Court Says It Can Execute Decrees Below Pecuniary Threshold If Original Suit Exceeded It

The Delhi High Court has recently held that it can execute a decree of less than ₹2 crore if the original suit was valued at more than ₹2 crore, which is the court's pecuniary threshold.The court, relying on Sections 37 and 38 of the Code of Civil Procedure, held that the court that passed a decree retains the power to execute it, and a reduction in the decretal amount following settlement does not extinguish its jurisdiction."There is no quarrel with the said provision. Section 16 of the...

Defendant Rejecting Pre-Institution Mediation Can't Challenge Suit For Non-Compliance: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court on 5 October held that a defendant who refuses to participate in pre-institution mediation under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 cannot subsequently seek rejection of a commercial suit for failure to complete mediation, as the defendant cannot use its own refusal as a technical defence. A Division Bench comprising Justices Vivek Chaudhary and Nisha Sahay Saxena dismissed an appeal by Netsys Network Pvt Ltd and its directors against a Single Judge's 10 August...

Share Purchase Agreements Not Commercial Disputes Merely Due To Share Transfer: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court on 7 October held that a share purchase agreement does not qualify as a shareholders' agreement under Section 2(1)(c)(xii) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, merely because it concerns the transfer of shares. Disputes arising from such agreements cannot be classified as commercial disputes under the provision. A Division Bench comprising Justices Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya and Sandip Kumar De allowed appeals challenging a Single Judge's order dated 5 March 2021, which...

Commercial Suits Filed Before Civil Courts Cannot Be Rejected As Barred By Law: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court has held that a plaint involving a commercial dispute, filed before an ordinary civil court instead of a designated Commercial Court, cannot be rejected under Order VII Rule 11(d) of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) merely on that ground, as the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 does not impose a statutory bar on filing such suits.Justice S. Manu made the observation while rejecting an appeal filed by two defendants against the Thrissur Sub Court's February 14, 2025 order...

Commercial Court Can Secure Claim At Interm Stage If Party's Commercial Credibility Is In Doubt: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court has held that a commercial court can direct a party to secure a plaintiff's claim at an interim stage if it prima facie finds that the party's commercial credibility, probity, or substratum is in question. Justice Aniruddha Roy observed, “With the promulgation of the C. C. Act, 2015, even while trying a commercial suit, if the Court prima facie finds that the conduct of the defendant is such that it might have lost its commercial credence and probity or substratum,...

Settlement Of Sale Of Goods Decretal Dues Retains Commercial Character: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court on 29 September held that a subsequent settlement concerning decretal dues arising from a sale of goods transaction can retain the character of a commercial dispute under the Commercial Courts Act. Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay directed that the suit between M. Walter and Co. and Rajashi Developers Pvt Ltd be converted into a commercial suit, noting that the dispute constituted a commercial dispute under the Commercial Courts Act. The Bench observed: “The commercial...

Commercial Suit Filed Before Ordinary Civil Court Must Be Returned, Not Rejected: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court on 30 September held that a plaint filed before an ordinary civil court in a suit involving a commercial dispute must be returned for presentation before the competent Commercial Court, rather than rejected under Order VII Rule 11(d) of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC). Justice S Manu dismissed an appeal filed by the defendants against the First Additional Sub Court, Thrissur's order directing return of the plaint in a suit for dissolution of partnership. The Bench observed...

Delhi High Court Upholds Constitutional Validity Of Sec. 19 In 2018 Commercial Courts Amendment Act

The Delhi High Court on 30 September upheld the constitutional validity of Section 19 of the Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts (Amendment) Act, 2018, holding that applying the amended regime only to commercial disputes instituted on or after 3 May 2018 does not violate Article 14 of the Constitution. A Bench comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia dismissed a petition filed by Alpro Industries and others...