ARUN TRADING COMPANY v. DEC AGROTECH PRIVATE LIMITED
CW/2611/2020 · 2025-02-07
Narendra Singh Dhaddha
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 4500 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 4500 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:5515] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2611/2020 Arun Trading Company, Situated At 18/1, Maharshi Debendra Road Kolkata- 700007 Through Proprietor Shri Raj Kumar Kheria. ----Petitioner Versus
1. Dec Agrotech Private Limited, Office At 148, Utkalmoni Gopabandhu Sarani (Cotton Street), Fourth Floor, Kolkata, 700007 Through Director Dinesh Kumar Goyal.
2. Piyush Kheria S/o Shri Raj Kumar Kheria, Through Arun Trading Company, 18/1, Maharshi Debendra Road, Kolkata- 700007
3. Rahul Kheria S/o Shri Raj Kumar Kheria, Through Arun Trading Company, 18/1, Maharshi Debendra Road, Kolkata- 700007 ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Himanshu Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Prakash Chandra Jain Mr. Shahnawaz Khan Ms. Kriti Jain HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA
Order 07/02/2025 This civil writ petition has been filed by the petitioner- defendant No.1 (for short ‘the defendant’) against the order dated 16.12.2019 passed by the Judge, Commercial Court No.4, Jaipur (for short ‘the trial Court’) in case No. 99/2018 whereby the trial Court had not decided the application filed by the defendant under
Order 7 Rule 11 CPC and directed the respondent No.1-plaintiff (for short ‘the plaintiff’) to first submit the compliance report with
[2025:RJ-JP:5515] (2 of 3) [CW-2611/2020] regard to Section 12-A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 (for short ‘the Act of 2015’).
Learned counsel for the defendant submits that the plaintiff filed a suit against the defendants for recovery of Rs. 1,24,91,798/- in which the defendant filed an application under
Order 7 Rule 11 CPC read with Section 12-A of the Act of 2015 but the trial Court vide order dated 16.12.2019 had not decided the said application filed by the defendant.
Learned counsel further submits that instead of deciding the application filed by the defendant under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC, trial Court admitted the fact that compliance of Section 12-A of the Act of 2015 is mandatory and gave direction to the plaintiff for submitting compliance report with regard to Section 12-A of the Act of 2015.
Learned counsel further submits that on account of in compliance of mandatory provision of Section 12-A of the Act of 2015, the trial Court should have dismissed the plaint filed by the plaintiff. So, the order dated 16.12.2019 passed by the trial Court be set aside.
Learned counsel for the plaintiff has opposed the arguments advanced by counsel for the defendant and submitted that trial Court had not decided the application filed by the defendant under
Order 7 Rule 11 CPC and the same is still pending. So, the present petition filed by the defendant is premature. Learned counsel also submits that Section 12-A of the Act of 2015 was declared mandatory from 20.08.2022, whereas the suit was filed in the year 2018. So, the present writ petition filed by the defendant be dismissed.
[2025:RJ-JP:5515] (3 of 3) [CW-2611/2020] I have considered the arguments advanced by counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order. It is an admitted position that the application filed by the defendant under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC is still pending. Compliance of Section 12-A of the Act of 2015 is mandatory or not is yet to be decided by the trial Court while adjudicating the application filed by the defendant under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC. In my considered opinion, petition filed by the defendant deserves to be disposed of with a direction to the trial Court to decide the application filed by the defendant under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC preferably as early as possible within a month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Accordingly, without interfering with the impugned order, the petition filed by the defendant is disposed of with a direction to the trial Court to decide the application filed by the defendant under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC preferably within a month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Till then, further proceedings regarding the suit pending before the commercial Court concerned shall remain stayed. Pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of.
(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J Ritu/113