The Court confirms the validity of filing a new written statement with a counterclaim due to a subsequent cause of action, following the transfer of a suit to the Commercial Court.
In a significant judgment, the Calcutta High Court, under Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul), has upheld the decision of the Commercial Court at Alipore to accept a fresh written statement with a counterclaim by the defendant, Batliboi Environmental Engineering Limited, against Eastern Metec Private Limited. This decision was rendered in the context of Money Suit No. 13 of 2022.
The dispute arose when the original written statement was filed on November 20, 2017, without a counterclaim. However, after the case was transferred to the Commercial Court, Batliboi Environmental Engineering sought to introduce a counterclaim, citing a new cause of action that emerged after the initial filing. The Commercial Court granted permission for this fresh written statement and counterclaim, which the plaintiff, Eastern Metec Private Limited, contested through a revisional application.
The plaintiff argued that the transfer of the suit under Section 15(3) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, did not allow for de novo proceedings and claimed that the new counterclaim was inconsistent with the original defense. They further argued that this acceptance was contrary to the provisions of Order VIII Rule 6A of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC), 1908.
In its judgment, the Calcutta High Court clarified that Order VIII Rule 9 of the CPC permits the filing of subsequent pleadings, such as a counterclaim, if a new cause of action arises, provided the court grants leave. The court emphasized that the Commercial Court acted within its jurisdiction by allowing the fresh written statement with a counterclaim. The High Court also addressed the supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution, noting that it does not bar revisional applications under Section 8 of the Commercial Courts Act.
The judgment highlights the legal provisions that allow defendants to amend their pleadings when new causes of action emerge, ensuring fair representation of all relevant facts before the court. The High Court dismissed the revisional application, thereby reinforcing the Commercial Court's order.
Bottom Line:
A defendant is allowed to file a fresh written statement with a counterclaim under Order VIII Rule 9 CPC if subsequent cause of action arises, subject to the leave of the court. The Commercial Court's acceptance of such a written statement and counterclaim is valid and requires no interference.
Statutory provision(s): Commercial Courts Act, 2015, Section 15(3), Order VIII Rule 6A, 6C, 8, 9 CPC, Section 8 of the Commercial Courts Act, Article 227 of the Constitution of India, Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Order VIII Rule 9
