The Supreme Court of India has recently strongly criticized the Gujarat Commercial Civil Court for delaying more than 17 years in deciding the cases in a recovery suit filed in 2001. The commercial court abruptly dismissed the suit after closing the plaintiff's evidence without a proper hearing. This delay raised serious concerns about the accountability of the legal system and the need for timely justice.
Read also: Supreme Court: Divorced Wife Entitled to Maintenance Reflecting Her Marital Standard of Living
In the case of Gujarat Industrial Investment Corporation Limited vs Varanasi Srinivas and others, the appellant had filed a recovery suit in 2001. However, the commercial court did not decide the cases until 2018 and then abruptly closed the plaintiff's evidence in 2022. The High Court later dismissed the plaintiff's appeal citing a delay of 476 days in filing the appeal and dismissed the case on merits. Aggrieved, the appellant approached the Supreme Court.
Read also: Supreme Court of India Dismisses Next Radio’s Petition Against Copyright Rule 29(4)
Expressing disappointment, the Supreme Court bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice N. Kotiswar Singh said:
“It took more than 17 years for the Commercial Civil Court to decide the issues and thereafter the Court found it fit to summarily end the suit by closing the evidence of the plaintiff and thereafter passing the consequential dismissal order. The manner in which the suit has been disposed of raises several questions including the accountability of the system.”
The Court emphasised that the High Court should have been more sympathetic and merciful while considering the delay of 476 days, particularly because the appellant had waited for more than two decades for the decision.
“In the peculiar circumstances of this case where the plaintiff has been in the queue for more than two decades, we are satisfied that the High Court should also have been sympathetic and merciful while considering the application for condonation of delay of 476 days.”
Read also: Law student Sharmistha Panoli sent to 14 days judicial custody over controversial video on Operation
The Supreme Court set aside the orders of both the High Court and the Commercial Court. It directed the commercial court to provide two opportunities to the plaintiff to produce its remaining evidence before July 31, 2025.
The court ordered:
“If the plaintiff fails to produce evidence, the commercial court shall be at liberty to close the evidence. The respondent-defendant shall then be given adequate opportunity to produce his defence evidence, thereafter passing judgment on merits.”
The Supreme Court ordered the commercial court to decide the case on merits by December 31, 2025, and clarified that it has not expressed any opinion about the merits of the case.
Further, in a related case (Gujarat Industrial Investment Corporation Ltd. v. Khilan Dharmsinh Ramaiya & Ors.), the Supreme Court struck down the decision of the commercial court to dismiss the suit for non-prosecution, holding that when the counsel for the plaintiff was present, the suit could not be dismissed on that ground. The case was restored to its original number and ordered to proceed with the deadline to conclude the case by December 31, 2025.
The parties are required to appear before the Commercial Court on June 16, 2025 for further proceedings.
Case Title: GUJARAT INDUSTRIAL INVESTMENT CORPORATION LTD. VERSUS VARANASI SRINIVAS & ORS.
Appearance:
For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Astha Sharma, Adv.[A.C.] Mr. Kabir Hathi, Adv. Ms. Jesal Wahi, AOR
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajiv Narula, Adv. Mr. Rohan Thawani, Adv. Ms. Pooja Dhar, AOR Ms. Aakriti Vikas, Adv. Mr. Anuj Kapoor, AOR Mr. Shivom Sethi, Adv.
