The Commercial Division held that an appeal under Section 13(1A) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 does not lie against an order rejecting an application to delete a party from the array, as such an order is not appealable under Order XLIII CPC.
The appeal was disposed of with liberty to the appellant to take recourse to other available legal remedies.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
NC: 2023:KHC:24075-DB COMAP No. 101 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF JULY, 2023
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE COMMERCIAL APPEAL NO. 101 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
MR SURESH, S/O MR SATHYANRAYAN, MAJOR IN AGE, NO.23, 2ND MAIN ROAD, 5TH BLOCK, KUMARA PARK WEST, BENGALURU - 560 020.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI VIKRAM HUILGOL, SR.COUNSEL FOR SRI. MOHANA C, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by PRAMILA G V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
- 2 - NC: 2023:KHC:24075-DB COMAP No. 101 of 2023
BENGALURU - 560 020, REP. BY ITS PROPRIETRIX, MRS POORNIMA SURESH.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI AMEETH DESHPANDE, ADVOCATE)
THIS COMMERCIAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 13 (1-A) OF THE COMMERCIAL COURTS ACT, 2015 PRAYING TO:
I. CALL FOR RECORDS ON THE FILE OF LXXXV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT BENGALURU (COMMERCIAL COURT/CCH-86) IN COM.O.S. 200/2021.
II. SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 04/03/2023 AS PER ANNEXURE-A PASSED BY THE COURT OF LXXXV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT BENGALURU (COMMERCIAL COURT/CCH-86) IN COM.O.S. NO. 200/2021 REJECTING I.A. FILED BY THE APPELLANT HEREIN/DEFENDANT NO. 3 UNDER ORDER 1 RULE 10 (2) READ WITH SECTION 151 OF CPC FOR DELETION OF THE NAME OF DEFENDANT NO. 3 FROM ARRAY OF PARTIES AND CONSEQUENTLY, BE PLEASED TO ALLOW THE SAID I.A. FILED BY THE APPELLANT HEREIN/ DEFENDANT NO. 3 UNDER ORDER 1 RULE 10 (2) READ WITH SECTION 151 OF CPC FOR DELETION OF THE NAME OF DEFENDANT NO. 3 FROM ARRAY OF PARTIES BEFORE THE HON’BLE COURT BELOW IN COM.O.S. NO.200/2021 AS PER ANNEXURE-J BY ALLOWING THE INSTANT APPEAL AND ETC.,
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
- 3 - NC: 2023:KHC:24075-DB COMAP No. 101 of 2023
JUDGMENT
Mr Vikram Huilgol, learned Senior counsel for the appellant.
Commercial Courts Act, 2015 has been filed against the order dated 04.03.2023 passed by the Commercial Court by which an application preferred by the appellant under Order I Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure has been rejected.
“(1A) Any person aggrieved by the judgment or order of a Commercial Court at the level of District Judge exercising original civil jurisdiction or, as the case may be, Commercial Division of a High Court may appeal to the Commercial Appellate Division of that High Court within a
period sixty days from the date of the judgment or order:
Provided that an appeal shall lie from such orders passed by a Commercial Division or a Commercial Court that are specifically enumerated under Order XLIII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1980 (5 of 1908) as amended by the Act and Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (26 of 1996.)”
NC: 2023:KHC:24075-DB COMAP No. 101 of 2023
available in law.
Sd/JUDGE
Sd/JUDGE
BRN
1 issue framed by the court
Whether an appeal under Section 13(1A) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 lies against an order rejecting an application under Order I Rule 10 CPC for deletion of a party from the array.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Mr Suresh
Mrs Erica Madhusudan Khoday
Mrs Poornima Suresh
Alök Aradhe
Anant Ramanath Hegde
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
