Court grants leave for additional document submission with cost implications, emphasizing reasonable cause under Commercial Courts Act.
In a significant ruling, the Calcutta High Court, under Justice Aniruddha Roy, has allowed Usha Martin Limited, the plaintiff in a commercial suit, to disclose additional documents at the argument stage. This decision, rendered on February 23, 2026, stems from an application by Usha Martin Limited in a case against Balurghat Technologies Limited, which is marked as undefended due to the defendant's failure to file a written statement.
The plaintiff sought permission to introduce additional documents crucial to supporting their claim, citing queries raised by the court during arguments. These documents, initially in the possession of Usha Martin Limited, were not disclosed at the time of filing the suit. The plaintiff argued that these documents were necessary to address specific questions raised by the court regarding detention charges and shipment logistics.
Justice Roy's decision hinged on Order XI Rule 1(5) of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) as amended by the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. The court noted that while Sub-Rule 4 mandates disclosure of documents within an extended period, Sub-Rule 5 provides a mechanism for further disclosure upon demonstrating reasonable cause. The court emphasized that the plaintiff must justify non-disclosure at the initial stage, which Usha Martin Limited successfully did, presenting cogent and reasonable explanations.
Citing prior judgments, including those from the Supreme Court and Delhi High Court, the court clarified that the genuineness of the documents is not to be scrutinized at the disclosure stage. Instead, their veracity will be examined during the trial, ensuring the plaintiff's right to present a full case is preserved without prejudicing the defendant.
The court imposed a cost of Rs. 50,000 on the plaintiff, payable to the Calcutta High Court Legal Services Committee, as a condition for allowing the additional documents. Furthermore, the defendant retains the right to cross-examine the plaintiff's witness, limited to these new documents.
This judgment underscores the court's discretionary power to permit late document submissions in commercial disputes, balancing procedural rigor with the need for comprehensive justice.
Bottom Line:
Commercial Courts Act, 2015 - Plaintiff permitted to disclose additional documents at the argument stage of an undefended suit under Order XI Rule 1(5) of CPC, upon showing reasonable cause for non-disclosure along with the plaint or within the extended period.
Statutory provision(s):
Commercial Courts Act, 2015; Order XI Rule 1(5) of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC).
Usha Martin Limited v. Balurghat Technologies Limited, (Calcutta) : Law Finder Doc id # 2858746
