Skip to main content
Court Order

Interim Order 32

CNR DLCT01016907202420 Feb 2026
Back to Case

Full Order Text

Interim Order 32 · 20 Feb 2026 · CNR DLCT010169072024

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: 3
CS (COMM) 1176/24
M/s. M.L.J AND SONS Vs. BAJAJ KAGAJ LTD.
20.02.2026
Present : Sh. Divyansh Tyagi, Ld. Proxy Counsel for plaintiff.
Sh. Kapil Midha, Ld. Counsel for defendant through
VC.
Ld. Counsels submitted that two applications one
filed by plaintiff u/o XI Rule 1 r/w Sec.151 CPC and the other is
filed by the defendant u/sec. 151 CPC for treating the issue of
territorial jurisdiction as preliminary issue are pending.
Arguments heard on application u/o XI Rule 1(5)
r/w Sec.151 CPC.
Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff submitted that the
plaintiff has annexed all the relevant documents along-with his
plaint to pove his case except ie. commission bills/invoices,
Commission Report and TDS Certificate of Financial year 2017-
18 & 2018-19. That the defendant in his Written Statement took
the objection that the plaintiff has deliberately not filed any
invoices, hence, these documents are very much necessary for just
and proper adjudication of this present case. That irreparable loss
and injury shall ocassion in case the documents are not taken on
record. Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff relies upon Order XI Rule 1
(c) CPC and submits that the exception has been carved in respect
of documents relevant only to answer to any case set up by the
defendant subsequent to the filing of the plaint. Ld. Counsel for the
plaintiff has relied upon judgement of Hon’ble High Court of Delhi
-- 1 of 3 --
in M/s. Ananya Space Design and Consultants &Anr. v. M/s. Ranjit
Interior in CMM No.1043/2025 and submits that the issues were
settled on 15.4.2024 and the application is filed on 02.11.2024,
however, the application has been filed prior to the commencement
of the trial though after the framing of the issues as PW1 has been
examined in chief only on 30.01.2025.
Ld. Counsel for the defendant on the other hand
submitted that the application is an abuse of process of law and has
been filed at a belated stage merely to impede the present
proceedings. That the plaintiff is trying to set up a new case which
is neither pleaded nor set up in the plaint. That the documents
sought to be filed now were well within the power, possession,
control and custody of the plaintiff and the plaintiff deliberately
chose not to file said documents with plaint or with the replication
and it has not been disclosed in the application as to why the said
documents were not filed at any prior stage. That there is no
reasonable cause for non-disclosure of these additional documents
earlier. Even otherwise, the documents have no relevance or
bearing upon the adjudication of the present suit.
Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff has drawn attention of
the Court to Order XI Rule 1 (5) CPC and relied upon judgment of
Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in M/s. Ananya Space Design and
Consultants &Anr. v. M/s. Ranjit Interior (in CMM
No.1043/2025).
Heard.
The plaintiff seeks to recover from the defendant an
amount of Rs.27,06,403/- on a set of facts that the plaintiff is a
-- 2 of 3 --
partnership firm duly registered and was providing parties/clients
to the defendant on commission basis from the year 2018 onwards
till April, 2022 and the defendant has been making payment
regularly by cheque as well as through account transfer. Later on,
the defendant started lingering on payment due setting up new
excuse each time, when the plaintiff requested for the balance
payment, stating that they were under some financial difficulty.
That the plaitniff is entitled to recover an amount Rs.27,06,403/-
due on the defendants regarding the commision. The plaintiff in
support filed the ledger account. Now the plaintiff seeks leave to
file the invoices, commission reports, TDS Certificates in support
as additional documents.
Let the plaintiff be present in person to answer the
querry of the Court as to why these invoices and documents were
not produced alongwith the plaint when these were clearly in
custody and power of the plaintiff, as the Ld. proxy Counsel
requires instructions in the matter after arguing for 15 minutes.
For further consideration, put up on 03.3.2026.
(Neelofer Abida Perveen)
District Judge (Commercial Court)-01
Central District/THC/Delhi/20.02.2026 SN
-- 3 of 3 --

TrustJury presents public court-record information for legal discovery and reference. Record availability and detail can vary by source and case.