Gujarat High Court
Gujarat Machinery Private Limited vs R.P.Poly Packs Private Limited on 14 August, 2025
Author: Sunita Agarwal
Bench: Sunita Agarwal
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2680/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/08/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2680 of 2025
=============================================
GUJARAT MACHINERY PRIVATE LIMITED
Versus
R.P.POLY PACKS PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS.
=============================================
Appearance:
MR KAMLESH P VAIDANKAR(10135) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
NILU K VAIDANKAR(8382) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MUNJAAL M BHATT(8283) for the Defendant(s) No. 1
=============================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE
SUNITA AGARWAL
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.N.RAY
Date : 14/08/2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL)
1. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and
perused the record, we may note that in the facts and
circumstances of the instant case, the issue was about
computation of limitation for filing of the suit of recovery
against the defendants, where in the plaint itself, a statement
was made to the effect that the defendants had made part
payments on 17.01.2017 and 28.12.2017 against certain
invoices for the supply of goods.
2. The submission of the learned counsel for the
respondents herein / defendants is that the statement made in
the plaint about the part payment made by the defendants on
28.12.2017 by certain cheques is incorrect.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2680/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/08/2025
undefined
3. We may note that in the plaint itself, the plaintiff had
mentioned that the cheque bearing No.262025 dated
28.12.2017 was drawn and issued by the defendants towards
the part payment of total outstanding and the said cheque was
presented by the plaintiff to its bank for clearance and the
same was cleared. Subsequently, the defendants have
fraudulently framed the plaintiff and having altered the
amount and the date of cheque and filed a police complaint
before the concerned police station as well as before the bank
(SBI Overseas Branch, Kanpur). As a result of which, the
plaintiff was landed in jail and got bail only after the order
dated 19.04.2018 passed by this Court.
4. In these facts and circumstances of the instant case
transpired from the record, we are of the considered view that
the question of limitation in the present case becomes a mixed
question of fact and law.
5. With these position, it was not permissible for the trial
Court to reject the plaint by invoking Order VII Rule 11 (d) of
the Code of Civil Procedure. The course of action for the trial
Court was to frame an issue of limitation and decide the same
as a preliminary issue after providing opportunity to both the
parties to lead their evidences.
6. At this stage, it is submitted by the learned counsel for
the respondents - defendants that a written statement has
already been filed before the trial Court.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2680/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/08/2025
undefined
7. With the above, we set aside the judgment and order
dated 06.06.2025 of rejection of the plaint passed by the
Commercial Court and remit the matter back for fresh
consideration after framing of issues with the assistance of
the learned advocates for the parties, permitting the parties to
lead their evidences and then decide the issue of limitation as
a preliminary issue before adverting upon any of the other
issues framed.
8. With the above observations and directions, the present
appeal stands disposed of.
(SUNITA AGARWAL, CJ )
(D.N.RAY,J)
SAHIL S. RANGER
