Bombay High Court
Sbi Capital Markets Ltd vs Eurocostpin Ltd. And Ors on 22 January, 2024
Author: Abhay Ahuja
Bench: Abhay Ahuja
2024:BHC-OS:1291
29-S-6081-1999.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.374 OF 2019
IN
SUIT NO. 6081 OF 1999
SBI CAPITAL MARKETS LTD. )...APPLICANT
IN THE MATTER BETWEEN
SBI CAPITAL MARKETS LTD. )...PLAINTIFF
V/s.
EUROCOSTPIN LTD. AND OTHERS )...DEFENDANTS
WITH
SUIT NO. 6081 OF 1999
Ms.Aisha Shaikh i/by Ms.S.Ansari, Advocate for the Applicant/Plaintiff.
None for the Defendants.
CORAM : ABHAY AHUJA, J.
DATE : 22nd JANUARY 2024
P.C. :
1. This Interim Application has been filed seeking leave under Rule
90 of the High Court Original Side Rules to the Plaintiff for ex-parte
judgment against the Defendants for want of Written Statement.
2. Rule 90 of the High Court Original Side Rules reads as under :
"R.90. Judgment for want of written statement.-
The procedure as provided in Order VIII, rule 10 shall be
followed for the judgment for want of written statement."
29-S-6081-1999.doc
3. Rule 10 Order VIII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC)
referred to in Rule 90 of the High Court Original Side Rules clearly
provides procedure when a party fails to present written statement in
the time permitted or fixed by the Court. The said Order VIII Rule 10
of the CPC is usefully quoted as under :
"10. Procedure when party fails to present written statement
called for by Court - Where any party from whom a written
statement is required under rule 1 or rule 9 fails to present
the same within the time permitted or fixed by the Court, as
the case may be, the Court shall pronounce judgment against
him, or make such order in relation to the suit as it thinks fit
and on the pronouncement of such judgment a decree shall
be drawn up."
4. It is observed from the above that when a party from whom a
written statement is required under Rule 1 or Rule 9 fails to present the
same within the time permitted or fixed by the Court, the Court shall
pronounce judgment against him or make such order in relation to the
Suit as it thinks fit and on pronouncement of such judgment a decree
shall be drawn up. It is observed that the Plaintiff has filed the Suit for
seeking declaration of the lease agreement dated 16 th February 1996 as
terminated and also for payment of Rs.2,20,87,288.00 jointly and
severally by the Defendants to the Plaintiff. That the writ of summons
had been served and appearance had been filed by the Defendants on
9th July 2014, however, no written statement was filed. That the matter
29-S-6081-1999.doc
appeared before this Court (Coram : B. P. Colabawalla, J.) on 20 th
August 2014 and the Court after recording that written statement was
not filed, placed the matter for ex-parte decree. Thereafter, on 8th
January 2015, the matter came up before another Bench (Coram :
Mrs.Roshan Dalvi, J.) and the said order recorded that no written
statement was filed and the Suit had remained undefended and
directed that the Suit be placed before an appropriate Court for ex-
parte decree.
5. Thereafter, the matter appeared before another Bench of this
Court (Coram : G.S.Patel, J.) on 18 th September 2014 and the Plaintiff
was directed to take out a Notice of Motion for leave under Rule 90 of
the High Court Original Side Rules. Thereafter, the matter appeared on
8th April 2019 (Coram : G.S.Patel, J.) and the Advocate on record
appeared and the Court granted liberty to the Plaintiff to file Notice of
Motion seeking a judgment for want of written Statement in terms of
Rule 90 of the High Court Original Side Rules. That is how this Notice
of Motion has come to be filed.
6. Ms.Shaikh, learned Advocate, appears for the Plaintiff and
submits that the Defendants have not filed written statement and
29-S-6081-1999.doc
therefore the Plaintiff has become entitled for ex-parte decree under
Rule 90 of the High Court Original Side Rules and that this Court
accordingly pass a judgment for want of written statement.
7. From the above submissions, it is clear that the Plaintiff is
entitled to leave under Rule 90 of the Bombay High Court (Original
Side) Rules. Accordingly, leave under Rule 90 of the Bombay High
Court (Original Side) Rules is granted. Interim Application accordingly
stands disposed.
SUIT NO. 6081 OF 1999
8. List for ex-parte decree on 4th March 2024.
9. Let the Plaintiff furnish affidavit of evidence along with
compilation of documents.
(ABHAY AHUJA, J.)
