On a quiet afternoon in Court on the Original Side of the Calcutta High Court a routine-looking procedural application ended up deciding the fate of an entire defence. Justice Aniruddha Roy made it clear that commercial litigation leaves little room for casual delays. Once the clock runs out, it really runs out.
The order came in a dispute between Veeline Holdings Private Limited and Khetawat Properties Limited, but its impact goes much wider for businesses fighting cases in commercial courts.
Read also:- Bombay High Court Says 'Technical Breaks' Can't Deny Maternity Leave, Orders Maharashtra Medical College to Pay Assistant Professor Dues
Background
The suit itself is a commercial dispute pending before the Commercial Division of the High Court. The defendant, Khetawat Properties, was served with summons on April 18, 2025. Under the Commercial Courts Act, a defendant gets 30 days to file its written defence, and at best, a stretch up to 120 days if the court allows it with reasons.
Here, the 120-day deadline expired around August 17, 2025. Just a few days earlier, on August 6, the matter was mentioned before a coordinate bench, which granted “leave” to submit the written statement in the department, subject to acceptance by the court.
Later, the defendant filed a formal application on August 19, seeking extension of time. The plaintiff objected sharply, arguing the deadline had already passed and the defence stood forfeited by law.
Read also:- Kerala High Court refuses bail to Palakkad man accused of bus harassment, says grave allegations block extraordinary relief under new
Court’s Observations
Justice Roy spent considerable time unpacking what the law actually requires in commercial suits, and what it does not forgive. The judge noted that unlike ordinary civil cases, commercial disputes follow a stricter regime meant to avoid endless delays.
“The statute uses the word ‘shall’ repeatedly,” the bench observed, underlining that after 120 days, “the defendant shall forfeit the right to file the written statement and the court shall not allow it to be taken on record.”
The court rejected the argument that oral leave or mere submission of papers in the department amounts to a valid filing. Leave granted earlier was clearly “subject to acceptance by this Court”, and acceptance, the judge explained, means a reasoned order based on a proper written application.
Without such an application filed within 120 days, the court said, it loses power altogether. In simple terms, once the deadline passes, even the judge cannot revive the defence.
Read also:- Karnataka High Court Quashes Trial Court Stay in ₹2.33 Crore Hotel Dispute, Cites Judicial Consistency and Misuse of CPC Section 10
Decision
Holding that the defendant failed to file a mandatory written application within the 120-day period, the High Court directed that the written statement already submitted be taken off the file. The suit will now proceed as an undefended commercial suit.
The application seeking extension of time was dismissed, with the court recording that it had been filed too late to be entertained.
Case Title: Veeline Holdings Private Limited vs Khetawat Properties Limited
Case No.: IA No. GA-COM/2/2025 in CS-COM/825/2024
Case Type: Commercial Civil Suit (Original Side, Commercial Division)
Decision Date: 17 December 2025
