JHARKHAND URJA UTPADAN NIGAM LTD. & ANR. versus M/S BHARAT HEAVY ELECTRICALS LIMITED

JHARKHAND URJA UTPADAN NIGAM LTD. & ANR. versus M/S BHARAT HEAVY ELECTRICALS LIMITED

Order XX Rule 1 CPC as amended for Commercial Courts is directory and does not postpone the commencement of limitation until the registry supplies a copy of the judgment; parties must exercise diligence to procure certified copies, and in the circumstances of this case a 301-day delay caused by inaction/ negligence could not be condoned under Section 5 of the Limitation Act given the object of speedy disposal under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015.

Parties
Petitioner: Jharkhand Urja Utpadan Nigam Ltd. & Anr.; Respondent: M/s Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
15 April 2025
Procedural Posture
Special Leave Petition (civil) / Judgment
Outcome
Petition dismissed.
Legal Topics
Condonation of Delay, Period of Limitation, Order XX Rule 1 CPC, Free Copy of Judgment, Commercial Courts Act, 2015
Commercial Law Civil Procedure Law of Limitation Condonation of Delay Period of Limitation Order XX Rule 1 CPC Free Copy of Judgment Commercial Courts Act, 2015

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jharkhand Urja Utpadan Nigam Ltd. & Anr.

Petitioner

M/s Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Special Leave Petition (civil) / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the amended provision of Order XX Rule 1 CPC is mandatory so that limitation runs only from communication/provision of a copy of the judgment to the parties or whether limitation runs from pronouncement of judgment
  2. 2 Whether delay of 301 days in filing an appeal under Section 13(1-A) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 can be condoned under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 in view of the object of speedy disposal of commercial disputes

Ratio Decidendi

Order XX Rule 1 CPC as amended for Commercial Courts is directory and does not postpone the commencement of limitation until the registry supplies a copy of the judgment; parties must exercise diligence to procure certified copies, and in the circumstances of this case a 301-day delay caused by inaction/ negligence could not be condoned under Section 5 of the Limitation Act given the object of speedy disposal under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015.

Court Disposition

Petition dismissed.

Orders

  • Exemption Application is allowed.
  • This petition fails and is hereby dismissed.