Calcutta High Court Rejects Written Statement Filed Beyond 120 Days; Holds Postal Service At Registered Office Valid Under CPC

The Calcutta High Court has held that service of a writ of summons on a company by speed post at its registered office constitutes valid service under Order XXIX Rule 2(b) of the Code of Civil Procedure, thereby triggering the mandatory 120-day period for filing a written statement under the Commercial Courts framework.Justice Aniruddha Roy dismissed NTC Industries Limited's application seeking extension of time to file its written statement in a demurrage claim suit filed by MSC Mediterranean Shipping Company S.A. and another. Holding that the statutory deadline had long expired, the Court declared that the defendant had forfeited its right to file the written statement and directed that the suit shall proceed as undefended.The defendant argued that although the summons was shown as delivered by speed post on November 14, 2024, there was no proof that it was received by a director, secretary or principal officer as contemplated under Order XXIX Rule 2(a). According to the defendant, valid service occurred only on November 22, 2024, when the Deputy Sheriff's office effected hand service on a principal officer.Rejecting this contention, the Court held that Order XXIX Rule 2(a) and Rule 2(b) operate disjunctively, not conjunctively. Therefore, the plaintiffs were not required to establish delivery to a designated officer when service was effected by post at the company's registered office.The Court observed: “The conditions stated therein are independent to each other and cannot be read in a conjunctive manner… Once the writ of summons has been served at the registered office of the defendant company… it is sufficient and lawful service.”Placing reliance on Shalimar Rope Works Ltd. v. Abdul Hussain H.M. Hasanbhai Rassiwala (1980) 3 SCC 595, the Court reiterated that delivery of summons by post at the registered office carries a presumption of valid service unless rebutted.Justice Roy held: “The defendant has forfeited its right to file written statement and the written statement shall not be allowed to be taken on record.”The Court further directed that if any written statement was already submitted, the Registry must remove it from the record and mark the suit as undefended.Finding deliberate suppression of the earlier postal service date and holding that the defendant's request was barred by the statutory timeline, the Court dismissed the application without costs.The commercial suit for recovery of alleged demurrage charges of over ₹2 crore will now proceed ex parte against NTC Industries.Case: MSC MEDITERRANEAN SHIPPING COMPANY S. A. AND ANR. VS NTC INDUSTRIES LIMITEDCase No: CS-COM/749/2024Click here to read order

Calcutta High Court Rejects Written Statement Filed Beyond 120 Days; Holds Postal Service At Registered Office Valid Under CPC

Srinjoy Das

Tags