2025:KER:27305 Coml. Appeal No. 5 of 2022 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. NITIN JAMDAR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.MANU WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 5TH CHAITHRA, 1947 COML.A NO. 5 OF 2022 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 31.03.2022 IN CS NO.112 OF 2020 OF ASSISTANT SESSIONS COURT/PRINCIPAL SUB COURT / COMMERCIAL COURT, KOLLAM APPELLANT/PLAINTIFF: AMAGO EXIM PRIVATE LIMITED 13/938, KARUVELIPADDY EAST, THOPPUMPADY (P.O.), COCHIN- 682 005, KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, MR. MATHEW S/O. CHERIAN KUNJU, AGED 47 YEARS, HOUSE NO. 13/938, KARUVELIPADY EAST, THOPPUMPADY (P.O.), ERNAKULAM – 682 005. BY ADVS. A.V.THOMAS (SR.) A.KEVIN THOMAS LIJO JOSEPH (THOPPIL) RESPONDENT S / DEFENDANTS 1 TO 3 : 1 GILGAL CASHEW EXPORTS AVANESHWARAM RSPO, PATHANAPURAM, KOLLAM-691 517 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, SARAMMA JOHN. 2 SARAMMA JOHN, W/O YOHANNAN, TINJU BHAVAN, KOTTAVATTAM JUNCTION, ILAMBAL POST, PUNALUR, KERALA – 691 508. 2025:KER:27305 Coml. Appeal No. 5 of 2022 2 3 ANJU JOHN, D/O YOHANNAN, TINJU BHAVAN, KOTTAVATTAM JUNCTION, ILAMBAL POST, PUNALUR, KERALA – 691 508 BY ADVS. P.SANJAY A.PARVATHI MENON THIS COMMERCIAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26.03.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2025:KER:27305 Coml. Appeal No. 5 of 2022 3 JUDGMENT Dated this the 26th day of March, 2025 Nitin Jamdar, C.J. Heard Mr. A. Kevin Thomas, learned counsel for the Appellant. 2. The appeal is listed on the final hearing board. 3. In this appeal, the Appellant is challenging the judgment and order passed by the Principal Sub Judge (Judge, Commercial Court), Kollam dated 31 March 2022 in C.S. No. 112 of 2020. 4. The learned counsel for the Appellant states that in view of the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Sleebachen v. State of Kerala1, the appeal would lie to the District Court and it was erroneously filed before the High Court. He relies on the following observations of the Division Bench in paragraphs 38 and 39 of the said decision: “38. As held hereinbefore at paragraph 36.5, the judgment or order of a Commercial Court below the level of a District Judge in territories over which the High Courts have no ordinary original civil jurisdiction cannot be challenged before the High Court, invoking the provisions under sub-section (1A) of Section 13 of the Commercial Courts Act. Such a judgment or order has to be challenged before the Commercial Appellate Court designated under Section 3A at the District Judge level, by invoking the provisions under sub-section (1) of Section 13 of the said Act. 1 2024 (4) KLT 449 2025:KER:27305 Coml. Appeal No. 5 of 2022 4 39. Therefore, in order to challenge the judgment and decree dated 24.08.2023 of the Commercial Court (Principal Sub Court), Palakkad in C.S.Nos.27 to 30 of 2023, the appellant has to file appeals invoking the provisions under sub-section (1) of Section 13 of the Commercial Courts Act, as amended by the Amendment Act of 2018, before the Commercial Appellate Court designated under Section 3A at the District Judge level, i.e., the Principal District Court, Palakkad.” 5. In view of the above, the same course of action which was adopted in the case of Sleebachen v. State of Kerala will have to be adopted in the present case as well. The Registry to take necessary steps accordingly. 6. The appeal is disposed of. Sd/- Nitin Jamdar Chief Justice Sd/- S. Manu Judge vpv