M S Kavitra Exports Pvt Ltd Through Its Director Sh Aman Bansal vs. M S Kaaya U K Ltd Through Its Director Sh Purshottam Lal

$~6,7,8
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of decision:01.08.2023
6
+ CM(M) 821/2023
M S KAVITRA EXPORTS PVT LTD THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR
SH AMAN BANSAL ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Vishesh Wadhwa, Advocate
(Through VC)

versus

M S KAAYA U K LTD THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR SH
PURSHOTTAM LAL ..... Respondent
Through: None
7
+ CM(M) 825/2023
M/S KAVITRA EXPORTS PVT LTD THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR
..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Vishesh Wadhwa, Advocate
(Through VC)

versus

M/S KAAYA U K LTD AND ORS ..... Respondents
Through: None
8
+ CM(M) 826/2023
M/S KAVITRA EXPORTS PVT LTD THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR
..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Vishesh Wadhwa, Advocate
(Through VC)


CM(M) 821/2023 & connected Page 1 of 6


Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RASHMI DABAS
Signing Date:03.08.2023
13:37:32

versus

M/S KAAYA U K LTD AND ANR ..... Respondents
Through: None
%
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA
J U D G M E N T

MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J (ORAL) :
CM APPL. 25678/2023 in CM (M) 821/2023(for exemption)
CM APPL. 25736/2023 in CM (M) 825/2023(for exemption)
CM APPL. 25769/2023 in CM (M) 826/2023(for exemption)
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
Accordingly, the present applications stand disposed of.
CM (M) 821/2023
CM (M) 825/2023
CM (M) 826/2023
1. These petitions filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India
impugn a common order dated 23.01.2023 passed by the Additional District
Judge- 02, Shahdara, Karkardooma District Courts, Delhi (‘Trial Court’)
whereby the Petitioner’s applications filed under Order VII Rule 14(3) of the
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (‘CPC’) for placing on record additional
documents have been dismissed by the Trial Court.
1.1. The Petitioners herein has instituted three (3) separate suits for the
recovery of money and have similarly instituted three (3) complaints under
Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 (‘N.I Act’) against the
Respondent No. 1, company and other Respondents.
1.2. For the sake of convenience, the facts set out for CM (M) 821/2023 are
being referred to. The Petitioner herein is the original plaintiff and the

CM(M) 821/2023 & connected Page 2 of 6


Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RASHMI DABAS
Signing Date:03.08.2023
13:37:32

Respondents are the original defendants in civil suit no. 39/2017 titled as M/S
Kavitra Exports Pvt. Ltd. v. M/S Kaaya U.K. Ltd & Ors. ,
2. The learned counsel for the Petitioner states that at the stage of leading
plaintiff’s evidence, before the first witness was cross-examined, the
Petitioners filed the application on 25.11.2017 under Order VII Rule 14(3) of
the CPC for placing on record additional documents, details whereof as filed
in this petition, are as under:

2.1. He states that simultaneously applications were also filed in the
criminal complaints filed under Section 137 of N.I Act for bringing the said
documents on record in the criminal proceedings. He states that the delay in
filing the said documents was condoned by a Coordinate Bench of this Court

CM(M) 821/2023 & connected Page 3 of 6


Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RASHMI DABAS
Signing Date:03.08.2023
13:37:32

vide order dated 11.10.2022 passed in CrL. M.C. No. 2193/2022 titled as M/S
Kavitra Exports Pvt Ltd. Through Director/AR Aman Bansal v. State NCT
Of Delhi and Anr. which reads as under:
“1. Petition has been preferred on behalf of the petitioner under Section
482 Cr.P.C. for setting the aside of order dated 26.07.2021 passed by the
learned MM, District East, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi in complaint case No.
58433/2016 titled M/s Kavitra Exports Pvt. Ltd. Vs. M/s Kaavya U.K. Ltd.
whereby the application under Section 311 Cr.PC filed on behalf of the
complainant/petitioner for filing of additional documents on record and
examination of Gautam Lal Bansal to prove the documents was dismissed.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that only witness
GautamLal Bansal is to be examined on behalf of the petitioner to prove on
record the relevant documents, which have been filed along with the
application under Section 311 Cr.PC.
3. At this stage, the application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. filed on
behalfof the petitioner is not opposed by learned counsel for respondent No.
2. However, it is prayed that the learned Trial Court may be directed to
conclude the proceedings in a time bound manner to avoid any further delay.
3. I am of the considered opinion that the power conferred under
Section311 Cr.PC needs to be invoked by the Court in order to meet the ends
of justice. Considering the facts and circumstances and in view of no
objection of learned counsel for respondent No. 2, the order passed by the
learned Trial Court is set aside. Petitioner is permitted to examine Gautam
Lal Bansal and bring on record the relevant documents, as referred in the
application under Section 311 Cr.PC.
Learned Trial Court is further directed to make an endeavour to
dispose of the proceedings in a time bound manner, preferably within a period
of four months from the date of receipt of this order.
Petition is accordingly disposed of.
A copy of this order be forwarded to the learned Trial Court for
information and compliance.”

2.2. He states that the non-filing of the said documents at an earlier stage
was a bona fide mistake. He states that as is evident from the documents, the
documents at serial no. 4 and 5 were in fact emailed by the Accountant of the
Respondents to the Petitioner herein and have therefore, originated from the
Respondent.
2.3. He similarly states that with respect to the documents at serial nos. 1, 2
and 3, the said documents are also available in the record of the concerned

CM(M) 821/2023 & connected Page 4 of 6


Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RASHMI DABAS
Signing Date:03.08.2023
13:37:32

Ministry and Customs Department at the Airports since the said documents
were scrutinized and bear the stamps of the Government of India through their
concerned Ministries and Custom authorities.
2.4. He states that these additional documents are important to be taken on
record for fair adjudication of the civil suit as it will assist the Trial Court to
corroborate the transactions between Respondent No.1, company and the
Petitioner Company.
2.5. He further states, however, the genuineness of the said documents will
also be duly tested during the course of evidence however, excluding the said
evidence at this stage will cause grave prejudice to the Petitioner.
2.6. He states that the delay caused due to the late filing of the documents
may be compensated to the Respondents by imposing legal costs.

3. None appears on behalf of the Respondent despite advance service in
the petition.
4. This Court has perused the petition and considered the submission of
the counsel for the Petitioner.
5. A perusal of the order dated 11.10.2022 passed by a Coordinate bench
in CrL. M.C. No. 2193/2022, shows that the Respondents gave their no
objection to the said additional documents being brought on record in the
criminal proceedings.
6. The documents as contended by the Petitioner have either originated
from the Respondent or form part of the record of the statutory authorities and
will therefore, be duly verified during trial. In view of the fact that the
evidence of the first witness of the Petitioner has not been tendered, no
prejudice will be caused to the Respondent, if the additional documents are
permitted to brought on record. The Respondent will have sufficient

CM(M) 821/2023 & connected Page 5 of 6


Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RASHMI DABAS
Signing Date:03.08.2023
13:37:32

opportunity to cross-examine the Petitioner on the said documents. The
Respondent can be compensated by imposing legal costs for the delay in filing
the said additional documents.
7. This Court deems it appropriate to allow the present petitions subject
to the Petitioner herein paying costs of Rs 20,000/- in each of the civil suits to
the Respondents on or before 03.08.2023, i.e., the date already fixed before
the Trial Court.
8. The Petitioner is directed to file his amended affidavit by way of
evidence of PW-1, Mr. Aman Bansal for tendering these additional
documents within a period of one (1) week.
9. It is clarified that the question whether, the said documents are
admissible will be decided by the Trial Court as and when the issue is raised
by the Respondent in the trial. It is made clear that this Court has not examined
the veracity of these documents or their admissibility as the said issues have
not arisen for consideration in the impugned order.
10. With the aforesaid directions, the present petitions are allowed and the
impugned orders are set aside.



MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J
AUGUST 1, 2023/ hp/ms


CM(M) 821/2023 & connected Page 6 of 6


Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RASHMI DABAS
Signing Date:03.08.2023
13:37:32