The Calcutta High Court has clarified that once a civil suit is transferred to a Commercial Court, the filing of an additional written statement or a counterclaim by a defendant is not barred if leave is granted under the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure. The Division Bench of the High Court was dealing with an appeal arising from a commercial dispute where the defendant sought to file an additional written statement and a counterclaim after the suit had been transferred to the Commercial Court at Alipore. The defendant asserted that the Commercial Courts Act and related procedural rules did not prohibit the filing of such pleadings once the suit stood transferred, and relied on the leave of the court granted under Order VIII Rule 1A and Order VIII Rule 2 of the CPC to substantiate that position.
The suit in question involved a contract dispute where the plaintiff claimed amounts due under agreements for supply and services, and the defendant resisted the claim while also seeking to assert its own set-off and counterclaims. The trial court, after recording the initial pleadings, had transferred the matter to a Commercial Court on the ground that the subject matter involved a commercial dispute as defined under the Commercial Courts Act. At the subsequent stage, the defendant applied for leave to file an additional written statement and a counterclaim to raise further issues and set-offs, arguing that such filings were permissible under the leave provisions of the CPC.
The trial court refused the permission sought by the defendant, holding that once a suit is transferred to the Commercial Court the procedural regime governing Commercial Courts would prevail, and that under such regime leave for additional pleadings was not envisaged in the same manner as in ordinary civil suits. The defendant challenged this refusal in the High Court, contending that the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code, including those relating to leave for filing additional written statements and counterclaims, continued to apply even after transfer, subject to the court granting leave as mandated by the CPC.
Upon examining the submissions, the High Court observed that the Commercial Courts Act and the rules framed thereunder do not expressly oust the application of the CPC provisions relating to pleading amendments where leave is granted by the court. The Bench analysed the interplay between the statutory regime for Commercial Courts and the procedural provisions of the CPC, noting that the Commercial Courts framework was intended to provide a specialized forum for resolution of commercial disputes but did not intend to preclude parties from availing procedural rights such as seeking leave to amend pleadings or file counterclaims when justified. The court observed that the CPC provisions under Order VIII Rule 1A and Rule 2 permit filing of an additional written statement or a counterclaim upon obtaining leave of the court when a defendant has already filed a written statement, and that this liberty cannot be taken away merely because the suit is heard in a Commercial Court.
The High Court emphasised that the objective of the Commercial Courts Act was to ensure expeditious disposal of commercial disputes but not at the cost of denying parties their substantive rights under procedural law. The Bench also took note of the fact that commercial courts, while following a rigorous timeline, still remain courts of competent jurisdiction where parties can seek necessary permissions for procedural amendments subject to judicial discretion. In this context, the High Court held that the Commercial Court ought to have considered the defendant’s application for leave to file an additional written statement and a counterclaim on its merits, rather than rejecting it on the premise that such filings were barred by virtue of the transferred status of the suit.
Accordingly, the High Court allowed the appeal and set aside the order of the trial court refusing leave, directing that the Commercial Court consider afresh the defendant’s application for filing an additional written statement and a counterclaim in accordance with law. The Bench underscored that if leave is granted under the relevant provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, the defendant is entitled to file such pleadings even after the suit has been transferred to the Commercial Court. The judgment affirms that transfer to a Commercial Court does not extinguish procedural rights available under the CPC, and that courts must balance the objectives of specialized commercial adjudication with preservation of parties’ substantive procedural entitlements. The decision reinforces the principle that Commercial Courts, while operating within a specialized statutory framework, must apply procedural law in a manner that preserves fairness and allows parties to effectively present their case when leave is appropriately granted.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.