Original Side Rules On Accepting Counterclaim & Reply Need Amending Due To Rigidity Of S.18 Of Commercial Courts Act: Calcutta HC Frames Guidelines

The Calcutta High Court has held that the court's original side rules on accepting of plaint and counterclaim need to be amended due to the rigidity of Section 18 of the Commercial Courts act. In doing so, the bench of Justices Soumen Sen and Biswaroop Chowdhury also framed guidelines for the same till the amended rules were implemented. The Court held: In view of the stringent provisions in the Commercial Court Act, with regard to filing of pleadings and more particularly written statement it is imperative that the Original Side Rules so far as acceptance of counterclaim and reply thereto requires amendment. In view of the fact that writ of summons along with the plaint is served upon the defendant after scrutiny and after removal of all defects and only upon service of such authenticated plaint the obligation of the defendant to file written statement arises, similarly for a reply to the counter claim which in effect partakes the character of a written statement only upon service of an authenticated copy thereof, the time to file reply to the counter statement shall arise and the period of 120 days is required to be calculated from the date of service of such authenticated copy of the written statement along with counter claim. Having regard to the fact that no rule in exercise of power conferred under Section 18 on the issue has been framed and the existing Original Side Rules on this issue is silent on scrutiny we issue the following practice directions in line with Mr. M. Maria Albert Stanly (supra) till appropriate rules are framed:(i) The Commercial Division of this court with effect from 1st March, 2025 shall scrutinize every counter claim filed and shall follow the same procedure as applicable to scrutiny of a plaint before service of summons. (ii) After scrutiny of the counter claim filed by the defendant the registry of the commercial division shall within seven working days serve notice of such counter claim along with a copy thereof on the plaintiff or his advocate on record in the same manner as provided for suits in commercial disputes. (iii) All curable defects shall be removed by the defendant/s within a fortnight from the date of intimation of such defects, in default, the matter shall be placed before the Commercial Division. (iv) The period for filing the Written Statement by a plaintiff in response to a Counter-Claim filed by Defendant shall be reckoned from the date on which the notice along with copy of the Counter-Claim is served by the Registry of the Court on the plaintiff or his advocate, as the case may be. (v) While serving the notice with copy of the Counter-claim on the plaintiff, it shall be ensured that the copies of all documents relied by the Defendant in support of the counter-claim are simultaneously delivered to the plaintiffThe appeal involved the question of whether the timeline specified in Order VIII Rule 1 as amended by the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 would apply to the timeline within which the reply to the counterclaim in the written statement, sometimes also referred to as an additional written statement, is to be filed by the plaintiff. The Single Judge declined to extend the time to file an additional written statement beyond 120 days and had rejected the application filed by the plaintiff for an extension of time to file an additional written statement beyond that time.Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent raised the question of the maintainability of the appeal. He relied upon the proviso to Section 13 (1-A) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, to argue that an appeal can only be made from such orders as are specifically enumerated under Order XLIII of the Code of Civil Procedure. The senior counsel has also referred to Section 13(2) of the said Act to show that no appeal can lie from any order or decree otherwise than in accordance with the provisions of the said Act and the said sub-section has specifically excluded application of Letters Patent of a High Court. Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submitted that the Commercial Courts Act has not specifically dealt with the right of the plaintiff to file additional pleadings, there have been no amendments to the Code of Civil Procedure as far as the time limit prescribed for filing additional written statement under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. It was submitted that the practice directions for the Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of the High Court at Calcutta in exercise of Section 18 of the Commercial Courts Act 2015, have not dealt with the delay in filing reply to the counter statement. No amendment has been carried out in its Original Side Rules after the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 was enacted. The provision for subsequent pleadings under Order VIII Rule 9 CPC applies only to pleadings subsequent to the filing of written statement. However, it does not apply to an additional written statement.It is thus submitted that when the learned Single...

Original Side Rules On Accepting Counterclaim & Reply Need Amending Due To Rigidity Of S.18 Of Commercial Courts Act: Calcutta HC Frames Guidelines

Srinjoy Das

Tags