Commercial Court Grey Brick Textured Wall

Deepali Kalia-

Published on: August 1, 2021 at 2:14 PM

The Supreme Court granted leave in a special leave petition which raised the question of the Commercial Court’s jurisdiction to consider a suit of recovery of possession after termination of tenancy.

In the present case, the suit for recovery of possession was filed by the plaintiff who is a landlord against the defendant who is a tenant before a Commercial Court.

The plaintiff had approached the Calcutta High Court and filed a revision petition against the order which had rejected his plaint.

The issue which was primarily considered by the Calcutta High Court was whether a suit for recovery of immovable property under section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, pertained to a “commercial dispute” defined under Section 2(1)(c) of the Commercial Courts Act.

The Calcutta High Court dismissed the revision petition and held,

“The suits squarely arise out of a statutory right conferred by Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, having no direct nexus with the lease agreements in respect of the immovable properties concerned. Thus, the pre-condition of the applicability of Section 2(1)(c)(vii), that is, the emanation of the dispute out of the lease agreement, is not satisfied in the present suits.”

Taking support of the Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprise Ltd vs KS Infraspace LLP Limited judgment, Senior Advocate K. V. Viswanathan who was appearing for the plaintiff contended before the Apex Court that the suit before the Commercial Court was a maintainable one.

However, the Apex Court observed that the said judgment was not related to a suit filed by the landlord for eviction against the tenant.

The Apex Court denied the request for early hearing of the particular appeals and stated,

“We asked Mr. K. V. Viswanathan whether the petitioner would like to approach Civil Court rather than continuing with the suit filed before the Commercial Court to which Mr. K. V. Viswanathan, on instructions, has conveyed that he would like to have decision on merits as to whether Commercial Court should have a jurisdiction to entertain the suit filed after termination of tenancy.”

Also Read: PUCL submits before SC: Steps taken by Centre for execution of Shreya Singhal Judgement inadequate

Related Post