Bombay HC held appeal not maintainable because it did not fulfill the provisions of the Commercial Courts Act

December 16, 2023by Primelegal Team0

TITLE : Bank of India V Maruti Civil Works

CITATION : Appeal Form Order No. 362 of 2021

CORAM : Hon’ble chief justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya And Hon’ble justice Arif S, Doctor.

DATE:  15th  December, 2023

INTRODUCTION :

The appeal was filed under 13(1A) of the Commercial courts Act, 2015 to challenge the order  passed by the District Judge. The current appeal is filed under Order VII Rule 10 and Rule 11(d) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.  

FACTS :

the plaintiff is a partnership firm engaged in the business of builders and contractors since 1987. It was alleged that the Defendants fraudulently invoked the measures under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 to grab the property of the partner of the Plaintiff.

The question that was in consideration for the court is the maintainability of the appeal before the division bench keeping in view the proviso appended to Section 13(1) of the Act of 2015 which provides that an appeal shall lie from such orders passed by a Commercial Division or a Commercial Court which are enumerated specifically under Order XLIII of the CPC and Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

COURT’S ANALYSIS

The court analysed between the amended and unamended Section 13 of the Act and held that earlier, an appeal was provided against a “decision” of a Commercial Court or Commercial Division of a High Court to the Commercial Division of that High Court, whereas, after the amendment the expression “decision” has been substituted by the expression “judgment or order”.  

Sub Section 1A of Section 13 provides that a person aggrieved by a judgment or order can file an appeal. The court thus held that an appeal under Section 13(1A) of the Act of 2015 would lie only against the judgment and orders which are enumerated or enlisted under Order XLIII of the CPC. An order rejecting an Application moved under Order VII Rule 10 or Order VII Rule 11(d) of the CPC is not enumerated or enlisted in Order XLIII of the CPC is snot appealable.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Written by- Sanjana Ravichandran

click here to view judgement.

Primelegal Team

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *