Aase Ram Vs Amit Kumar (Supreme Court of India)
Summary: The Supreme Court clarified the proper procedural course where a civil suit is found to involve a commercial dispute triable by the Commercial Court. The litigation originated from Original Suit No. 449 of 2023 instituted before the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Gautam Buddh Nagar. The suit concerned operation of a brick kiln and accounts arising from an alleged partnership agreement. The defendant contended that the dispute was commercial in nature and therefore outside the jurisdiction of the ordinary Civil Court. The defendant sought return of the plaint under Order VII Rule 10 CPC and, alternatively, rejection of the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 CPC. The trial court rejected the plaint while also directing its return for presentation before the competent court. The Allahabad High Court affirmed the conclusion that the dispute was commercial and that the plaint should be presented before the Commercial Court. The Supreme Court held that where the Civil Court concludes that the dispute, being commercial in nature, must proceed before the Commercial Court, the appropriate course is to return the plaint under Order VII Rule 10 CPC. The entire plaint cannot simultaneously be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC. Accordingly, the Supreme Court affirmed the High Court’s order to the extent it directed return of the plaint and directed that the plaint be handed over to the original plaintiff for presentation before the competent Commercial Court within two weeks. The entire record of the proceedings was also directed to be transferred to the Commercial Court.
FULL TEXT OF THE SUPREME COURT ORDER
1. Leave granted.
2. This appeal arises from the judgment and order passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad dated 30-9-2024 in First Appeal No.278/2024 and Appeal from Order No.364/2024 respectively, by which the High Court dismissed the First Appeal as well as the Appeal from Order No.364/2024 filed by the appellant – herein.
3. We may clarify that the present appeal arises from the judgment and order passed by the High Court in First Appeal No.278/2024 and the order passed by the High Court in Appeal from Order is not a subject-matter of challenge before this Court.
4. Heard Mr. Abhinav Ramkrishna, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr. Sandeep Grover, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
5. The dispute is in a very narrow compass.
6. The appellant – herein instituted Original Suit No.449/23 in the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Gautam Budh Nagar, U.P. for injunction and rendition of accounts. In the said Suit, the respondent – herein (original defendant) took up a plea that since the dispute between the parties falls within the ambit of commercial dispute, the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division) has no jurisdiction to try the suit. The defendant made two fold prayers in his application. He prayed for return of plaint under the provisions of Order VII Rule 10 of the Civil Procedure Code and in the alternative also prayed for rejection of the plaint under the provisions of Order VII Rule 11 CPC.
7. If the Civil Court is of the view that the dispute being commercial in nature has to go before the Commercial Court then the plaint has to be returned under Order VII Rule 10 CPC. The entire plaint cannot be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC. This is the only clarification which is required in the present appeal.
8. We dispose of this appeal with a direction that the plaint of Original Suit No.449/2023 shall be handed over to the appellant – herein – original plaintiff so as to present it before the Court of competent jurisdiction i.e. the Commercial Court.
9. Let this exercise be undertaken within a period of two weeks from today.
10. The entire record of the proceedings shall stand transferred to the Commercial Court.
11. The order passed by the High Court to the extent of return of plaint stands affirmed.
12. Pending applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of.
1. Leave granted.
2. The appeal is disposed of, in terms of the signed order.
3. Pending applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of.
