|
CNR No.: UTDN01-001387-2019
Sum. Civ. Suit No. 13/2019
ORDER BELOW EXH. 1
The plaintiff – R.R. Kabel Limited Company has filed
present suit under Order 37 Rule II of Code of Civil Procedure. Suit
summons were issued to the defendants, but they did not appear.
Thereafter, the plaintiff led his evidence. While going through the entire
record of the suit, this Court had raised queries in respect of
jurisdiction. Hence, on 21.08.2020 this Court had given directions to
the plaintiff to argue on the point of jurisdiction of Commercial Suit
and also on the point of territorial jurisdiction as the defendants resides
and carries their business at Delhi. Thereafter, Ld. Counsel for the
plaintiff has submitted his Written Notes of Argument vide Exh.77. Ld.
Counsel for the plaintiff also submitted oral argument. I have gone
through the Written Notes of Argument submitted by the plaintiff. I
have gone through the provisions of Order 37 of Code of Civil
Procedure and the provisions of Commercial Courts Act, 2015.
2] The plaintiff has filed present suit for recovery of
Rs.1,66,58,240/- (Rs. One Crore Sixty Six Lacs Fifty Eight Thousand
Two Hundred Fourty Only). As per contents of the Plaint, the plaintiff
company had supplied goods of different types to the defendant
company. Out of the said transaction, an amount of Rs.1,12,24,048/-
(Rs. One Crore Twelve Lacs Twenty Four Thousand Forty Eight Only)
was due against the defendants as principle amount. The defendants
issued two cheques to the plaintiff company. But the cheques were
dishonored. Thereafter, the plaintiff company had filed criminal
complaint u/s 138 of N.I. Act which bears S.C.C. No.399/2019 against
the defendants. The said case is still pending before the Court of
Judicial Magistrate (First Class), Silvassa. (These are the facts in
short of plaintiff's suit).
3] Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff argued that the plaintiff
company is manufacturing the goods. The word “manufacture” is not
mentioned in the defination of Commercial Court. So also, the present
suit is based on bill of exchange which is negotiable instrument. Hence,
the provisions of Commercial Court are not applicable to present suit.
In section 2 sub section (c) of the Commercial Courts Act, it is
mentioned that ordinary transactions of merchant, banker, financiers
and traders such as those relating to mercantile documents, including
enforcement and interpretation of such documents are also commercial
dispute. The word “manufacture” is not mentioned in the said
defination of commercial dispute. However, in my opinion,
manufacturing of goods for commercial transactions are one of the base
of any ordinary transaction of merchants or traders. So also, the
documents filed with the list – Exh.3 shows that there are transactions
of merchants or traders such as those relating to mercantile documents.
Hence, in my opinion, the present suit comes within the defination of
Commercial dispute as mentioned in section 2(c) of Commercial Courts
Act, 2015.
4] Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff also argued that in the present
suit, the defendants did not appear before the Court and contest the suit
and hence, the provision of Summary Suit are applicable and not of the
Commercial Suit. Section 15 of Commercial Courts Act says that all
suits and application relating to commercial dispute of a specified value
pending in any Civil Court in any district or area in respect of which a
Commercial Court has been constituted, shall be transferred to such
Commercial Court.
5] Admittedly, the plaintiff has filed suit for recovery of sum
of Rs.1,66,58,240/- (Rs. One Crore Sixty Six Lac Fifty Eight Thousand
Two Hundred Forty Only). As per Notification of Union Territory
Administration of Dadra & Nagar Haveli and Daman & Diu
No.LAW/DMN/CCCD & AD (19)/2016-2017/25 dated 27/01/2020, the
Union Territory Administration of Dadra & Nagar Haveli and Daman &
Diu has specified the pecuniary value of Rs.50,00,000/- for the entire
Union Territory. The said Notification is based on the letter of Hon'ble
High Court of Judicature at Bombay No.B(W)A-2012 of
2018/176/2538 dated 21.01.2020. The Hon'ble High Court of Judicature
at Bombay has clarified some points to the Law Secretary of this
Territory vide its letter no.B(W)A-2102 of 2018/2563/37850 dated
28.11.2019. In the said letter, the reference of the Government of
Maharashtra Notification no.SPC 1319/162/C.R.36/IX dated
03.07.2019 has been given. There are three Notifications dated
03.07.2019 bearing no.SPC 1319/162/C.R.36/IX. All these
Notifications and the letters shows that this Court has no jurisdiction to
try present Suit.
6] The plaintiff's suit is appears to be commercial dispute as
per the defination mentioned in clause (c) of section 2 of the
Commercial Courts Act. As per the Notifications and letter Supra, this
Court has no jurisdiction to try present suit. As per Plaint, the plaintiff
is praying for recovery of Rs.1,66,58,240/- out of commercial
transaction. So also, it is required to mentioned that the defendants
resides at Delhi and the plaintiff has also filed criminal complaint u/s
138 of N.I. Act against the defendants in respect of those two cheques
which are mentioned in the Plaint. Thus, in my opinion, this Court has
no jurisdiction to conduct present suit and as per section 15 of the
Commercial Courts Act, this suit is required to be transferred to the
Court having jurisdiction. In the present suit the defendants did not
appear before the Court. Hence, in my opinion, compliance of section
10(A) of Code of Civil Procedure is not necessary. I pass following
order :-
O R D E R
1. The present suit be returned to the plaintiff to be presented
in the District Court (Commercial Court), Silvassa vide
Order 7 Rule 10 of Code of Civil Procedure.
2. The parties are directed to remain present before District
Court (Commercial Court), Silvassa on 11.01.2021.
3. Inform to parties accordingly.
Sd/-
[Y. S. Paithankar]
Date: 11/12/2020 Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.),
Silvassa. Dadra and Nagar Haveli,
Silvassa.
CERTIFICATE
I affirm that the contents of this P.D.F. File judgment/ order are same, word
to word, as per the original judgment.
Name of the Jr. Clerk :- Mr. Arvind P. Maheshwari
Court :- Civil Court (Sr. Dn.)
Date :- 11.12.2020
Judgment signed by the
Presiding officer on :- 11.12.2020
Judgment uploaded on :- 11.12.2020
|