The Delhi High Court recently passed an order effectively limiting the time for making oral arguments by the parties to a case under the Commercial Courts Act..In the case of Roland Corporation v. Sandeep Jain, the plaintiff sought a limit on the time for making oral arguments during the Case Management Hearing. The suit is already listed for final arguments on April 10, 2019, and the counsel for the defendant were appearing on advance notice..On Justice Rajiv Sahai Endlaw’s enquiry, the counsel for the plaintiff told the Court that they would need 45 minutes for making opening arguments and 30 minutes for rejoinder submissions..The Court observed that Order XV-A, Rule 5 of the Civil Procedure Code allows the Court to hold a Case Management hearing at any point during the trial. Rule 2 empowers the Court to limit the time for oral arguments made by the lawyers of both parties..However, the Court enquired if the phrase “during the trial” would include the stage where the recording of evidence has concluded and only final arguments remain to be heard..It was submitted that the scope of the phrase can be decided after considering the object of the said provision. The Order notes,.“It was reasoned, that the word ‘trial’ is of wide import and in its widest sense would include the proceedings right from institution of suit to the final determination by a judgment or decree.”.The Court took note of Rule 3 of Order XV-A, which provides for time-bound completion of a trial and for the trial to be concluded within six months from the date of institution of the suit..The Court, therefore, concluded that the present stage of the case would be included in the interpretation of the phrase “during the trial” for the purpose of setting up of time limits for making oral arguments..“Rule 3 of Order XV-A titled “Time limit for completion of trial” provides that in fixing dates and setting time limits for the purpose of Rule 2, the Court shall ensure that arguments are closed not later than six months from the date of the first Case Management Hearing. The same indicates that, at least for the purpose of Order XV-A of the CPC, trial would include this stage as well.”.Justice Endlaw thus disposed of the application, holding that the counsel for the plaintiff will be bound to the aforementioned time limits. The order also states that the Court may, if it finds the need to, set a similar time limit for defendant’s lawyers as well..The plaintiff company was represented by a team from Anand and Anand headed by Managing Partner Pravin Anand, along with Pundreek Dwivedi and Vibhav Mittal..The defendant was represented by Advocates Vihan Dang and Kavya Mammen.. Read the Order:
The Delhi High Court recently passed an order effectively limiting the time for making oral arguments by the parties to a case under the Commercial Courts Act..In the case of Roland Corporation v. Sandeep Jain, the plaintiff sought a limit on the time for making oral arguments during the Case Management Hearing. The suit is already listed for final arguments on April 10, 2019, and the counsel for the defendant were appearing on advance notice..On Justice Rajiv Sahai Endlaw’s enquiry, the counsel for the plaintiff told the Court that they would need 45 minutes for making opening arguments and 30 minutes for rejoinder submissions..The Court observed that Order XV-A, Rule 5 of the Civil Procedure Code allows the Court to hold a Case Management hearing at any point during the trial. Rule 2 empowers the Court to limit the time for oral arguments made by the lawyers of both parties..However, the Court enquired if the phrase “during the trial” would include the stage where the recording of evidence has concluded and only final arguments remain to be heard..It was submitted that the scope of the phrase can be decided after considering the object of the said provision. The Order notes,.“It was reasoned, that the word ‘trial’ is of wide import and in its widest sense would include the proceedings right from institution of suit to the final determination by a judgment or decree.”.The Court took note of Rule 3 of Order XV-A, which provides for time-bound completion of a trial and for the trial to be concluded within six months from the date of institution of the suit..The Court, therefore, concluded that the present stage of the case would be included in the interpretation of the phrase “during the trial” for the purpose of setting up of time limits for making oral arguments..“Rule 3 of Order XV-A titled “Time limit for completion of trial” provides that in fixing dates and setting time limits for the purpose of Rule 2, the Court shall ensure that arguments are closed not later than six months from the date of the first Case Management Hearing. The same indicates that, at least for the purpose of Order XV-A of the CPC, trial would include this stage as well.”.Justice Endlaw thus disposed of the application, holding that the counsel for the plaintiff will be bound to the aforementioned time limits. The order also states that the Court may, if it finds the need to, set a similar time limit for defendant’s lawyers as well..The plaintiff company was represented by a team from Anand and Anand headed by Managing Partner Pravin Anand, along with Pundreek Dwivedi and Vibhav Mittal..The defendant was represented by Advocates Vihan Dang and Kavya Mammen.. Read the Order:
