Dd 1 23.07.2026 [Bench Id:266438] In the High Court At Calcutta CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION COMMERCIAL DIVISION AO-COM/55/2025 CITIZEN HOSPITAL AND OTHERS VS NUOVE, A PARTNERSHIP FIRM Mr. Srikanta Dutta, Advocate (VC) … … For the Appellant 1. The appeal is directed against Order No.7 dated September 4, 2025 passed by the learned Commercial Court at Rajarhat, North 24 Parganas in MS (Com) 150 of 2024. 2. By the impugned order, learned Judge fixed the application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 filed at the behest of the appellant for consideration after noting that the application of the appellant contains defects such as signature missing in such application. 3. The order was passed in a suit filed before the Commercial Court established under the provisions of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. 4. Appeals in respect of the commercial suits are governed by Section 13 of the Act of 2015. 5. Section 13 of the Act of 2015 is as follows:- “13. Appeals from decrees of Commercial Courts and Commercial Divisions.—(1) [Any person aggrieved by the judgment or order of a Commercial Court below the level of a District Judge may appeal to the 2 Commercial Appellate Court within a period of sixty days from the date of judgment or order. (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 of 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, 1908 (5 of 1908) as amended by this Act and section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (26 of 1996).] (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force or Letters Patent of a High Court, no appeal shall lie from any order or decree of a Commercial Division or Commercial Court otherwise than in accordance with the provisions of this Act.” 6. Impugned order does not fall within the categories mentioned under Section 13 of the Act of 2015 read with Order XLIII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. 7. The present appeal is not maintainable. We find that, the appellant as the defendant is indulging in dilatory tactic in order to delay the disposal of the suit, if possible. The application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for consideration of the appeal contains defects which the learned Judge in her indulgence allowed rectification against such an order. The appeal is sought to be filed in order to delay the dismissal of the suit, if possible. 8. We, therefore, dismiss this appeal. However, we request the learned Trial Judge, to include the quantum of costs that may be imposed on the final 3 hearing of the suit taking into account the dilatory tactic employed by the appellant as also the filing of the present appeal. 9. AO-COM/55/2025 is accordingly disposed of. [Debangsu Basak, J.] [Ajay Kumar Gupta, J.] DEBABRATA DAS Digitally signed by DEBABRATA DAS Date: 2026.07.23 16:00:27 +05'30'