lr4/s Aryan Engergy Private Ltd v. 1. The Singareni Colleries Company Ltd

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased io stay all further proceedings in COS No.13 of 2022 on the file of Special Judge for Trial and Disposal of Commercial Disputes, Rangareddy District at LB Nagar Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. KONDADI AJAY KUMAR Counsel forthe Respondents: Smt. C. URMILA FOR SRI P. SRI HARSHA REDDY (SC FOR SINGARENI COLLIERIES CO. LTD) The Court made the following ORDER: THE HON'BLE JUSTICE MOUSHUMI BHATTN.(]:TARYA AND THE HONOUhTABLE JUSTICE GADI PRAVEE}{ ]IUMAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.36O6 OF 2( 25 NIr.KonclarlL,,\jar I{rur-rit. lcar nrrl r:,tLrnsr:l apDeariltg lor ll-rc p,.rL I l Q_!DER: (Per The Hon-lrle .lusLicc Moushurri tshattacharya) l 'l'he Cir.il Revision Pctition (CttP) ariscs out ci1 r I order cl.rted

02.O9.2025 passed ir-r I.A.No.270 ot 2025 in COS.Nc. l) ctl'2022 by thc Special .Iudge fbr Trial ancl Disposal of Comrrt r:ial Drsputes, Ranqa l(r'rldv I)is r',, r :rt I lj \3-;1' (( :,rntn(.r.i.,1 C, rtr

2. Wc have hcarcl counsci :rppearir-rg for the pctitr( r err t ho is the plainLiff in COS.No. 13 ol 2022 llied for reco\rcry of r ,ne) frolr the rcspondc n ts / dc lc rr di, r r t s.

3. The petitioncr / plain t ifT is aggricved b.y the rrr rLlgr,ted orcler dated 02.O9.2O25 ,,i,hereb) the learnecl Commercial r. -. -trt dismissccl the petitioner's i.A. fiieci for rcci:ivir-rg additional cir,r r r.re,ts under Ordr:r XI Rule I (5) read rvith section 151 of Tlrt joclc of Civil Proccdure , 1908, ('CircJ as :rme.rded by The Com,*rr t i tl C.trr[s Ac:t, 2015 ('the 2015 Act').

4. The prayer in I.A.No.27O of 2025 rvas for the Cc -rrt to receive the iisted documents in Lhe Suit and mark the samt r s trxhibits in 2 MB,J & GPK,J C.R.P.No.35O6 OF 2025 favour of the plaintiff/ petltioner. Aclmi ,edlrr, the l.A. u,as hlcd alLcr conclusion of thc recording of cvidence of pW. 1 in the Suit.

5. The icarned Commercial Court dismissecl the I.A. on the grouncl that once the pleadrngs have becn complcted and thc Trial of the case has commenccd, thc petition cr/ plai nti ff coutd not be permitted ro file the documcnts as per its convenicncc irr a piecemeal manucr in dcrogation of ord.. r XI Irulc i (5) of thc cpc. 'r-hc learned cornmc--rcial court *'as also of the 'icr,.' that thc pc titio ncr/ plaintiff had failcd tcr dcmonstrate any reasonablc causc for not filing the said documents al the time of hling of the Suit or belore the commencement ol'lrial an<1 for not evcn making any rcferencc to the docum..rt" i., the pleaclings and not explaining their relcvant to thc Suit; thereby failing to satisfr. the court for the exercise of its discrctio. to grant leave lor produc.re the additional documents and to take Lhe samc on record.

6. Order X[ of the CPC, as amendcd by the 2015 Act deals rvrth 'Disclosure, Discovery and Inspection o[ Documents in Suits before the Commercial Division of a High Court or a Commercial Court,. Order XI Rule 1 specifically deals r,r,ith the ,ciisclosure and discovery of documents' and mandates undcr sub-Ru1e (1) that the plaintiff shall hle a list of all documents and photocopies of all documents, in its pp,ver, possession, control or custody, pertaining lo the suit, along -y 3 MB,J & GPK,J C.R.P.!,tt 3606 OF 2025 u-ilh thc plaiDt. Ot-dcr XI Rulc 1(1) enumeratcs the clr L umenLs w,hich are to be mandatorrlv filed along rvith tl-re plaint. 7 In case of urgcnt filings, Orcler XI RuLe l (4) of ri.r CpC provides ar.r additional ri.'indorv for lhe plaintiff to scck iei, e tc, rcly on additional documents and subject to grant of such l,:ri., rbv thc Court thc plaintitT has ro filc sur:h addirional clocLtmcnLs r l Cr; r-LrL !r'ithin thirtv davs of filing rif thc Suil aloLrg tvitfr a cleckLrat:r r olt oath rhal the plarntifi has pr-c.rduced :r1l documcnts in iLs pou: -. p()ssesslon, cuntrol or custod). I)crlaining lu rhc lacls arrd cir,.u. ,Lances of the proceedings initi:rtcd by thc plain tifl ar-rd that the pir r :.r Lifl- does not have an)' other cLocumcnts in its povr.er, posscssi , r, controi or clrstod\.. Ordcr XI Rnte 1(5) of the CpC cor-rtinues tlLc r;r r-rdirLe further and bars the plaintilT lionr relyir-rg on docurne nts ,"r ht - r u,ere in the plaintiff's power, pi)sscssior-r, control or CLls[odv .. rd ,.r cre not ciisclosed along r,r'itit i I-re plarnt or u,ithrn llrr: erxtcnck:r I out jn Order XI Rule 1(4), save and except by le:rve of rir such lcave can be granted only upon the plaintil pcri,)d as sel : Ccurl where estabfishing reasonable cause for rron-disclosure along u.itl'r the pla, I

8. It would be clear from the above that Rules 1(4) r.,r d (5) of Order XI of the CPC cast an onerous burden on the plaintlir- \ /ith rcgard to 4 MB,J & GPK,J C.R.P.No.3606 OF 2025 bringing additional documcnts on record subject to the grant of leavc br- the Court 9 'lhc lirst u'indor'r' f.r' hling such aclditior.rar documcnrs is Lrr-rril thirly days from thc liling of thc Suit and Lhc sccond windou, thercof rests upon the discretion of thc Courl but is subjcct to the plaintiff cstablishing reasonable cause for non-discrosurc of ciocuments which wcre already in thc plaintiff's pos.cr, possession, control or custody, a.long with the plaint or cvcn u'ithin tltc extendcd timc as set out undcr Ordt.r XI I{ul,' I (4).

10. The Court is informecl rhat rhe Suit rl.as lilecl in June ,2022 and the pe titioner/ plain tiff sought to bring aCclitional clocuments on record at a belatcd stage b1. u,av of LA.No.270 of 2O2S filed on 1O.O4.2O25 and that Lo() at thc trme u,hen Trial in the Suit had already commenced. 1 1 . Morcove r, the only rcason given bv the petitioner/ plaintiff in thc Affidavit filed in supporL of thc I.A. is thar thc said documents,.are useful" to prove their casc and that the pe ti tioner/ plaintiff u,ould be "put to hardship" if thc san.re are noI received in cvictcnce. { - MB,J & GPK,J C.R.P..lVc 3606 OF 2025 1'2. We arc of tlte con sidered vierv LhaL a s, , r \. rue i n a thrcc-paragraph Alficlavit falls drastically short ol Ltrr r irtnr larc undcr (lrrlL r XI Rulr:s 1(1J :rncI (5) ol the CPC rvhich r,,.as irrr ;ror-rrted in Lhe Cil)(' ltursu:rlt lc rltr. 2015 Ar:t onl-r, lor thr, plLrposr 'I'r1-li cliting thc ,l:\1,,\ rlul (',rrnnt, ri r,tl SUit...

13. The lcrrrncd Commcrcial Court hencc did not ( rlrlri, .ut\'(.r.r-(,r in hrlcling that thL- plaintifl had failcd to shou. anv r, s()nirblc c:u.rse as rnandated ur-rclo- Order XI Rule i(5) ol. Lhe CIr-. !\re :rrc in aqrc('trtcltt *-ith t]rc ,.,iew Laken by the le:rrncd CornrL, I :Lirl C0urL ltnd accor-rlinqlv ilncl no nrcrit irt rhe Civil Revisiorr peLiti,.rn 1 1. C.R.l'].No.36()t, <tf 2O2i: is accorclingll. cljsmrss \ll :on n ei tcrl nriscr'LlzrricoLrs :rpplir ations shall stirnd closccl 'lhcrc shall lrc no order as to cosls SC/ P PONNA KRISHNA ASS STANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To,

1. The Special Judge for Trial and Disposal of Commercu Disputes, Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar.

2. One CC to SRI KONDADI AJAY KUMAR, Advocate i[ PUC] 3. One CC to SRI P. SRI HARSHA REDDY (SC FOR -s1\ GARENI COLLIERIES CO LTD) [OPUC]

4. Two CD Copies ul/ABK HIGH COURT OATED:03/'1 '1l2025 ORDER CRP.No.3606 ot 2O25 'a=i (" I TASC C -t. M11

1. Cr * I)ISMISSNG 1'I IE CI\/II- REVISION PETITION \\'Il'H()r.r1'c]os1's {&l,r