AMBALAL SARABHAI ENTERPRISES LTD. versus K. S. INFRASPACE LLP & ANR. on 4 October 2019

[2019] 13 S.C.R. 605

AMBALAL SARABHAI ENTERPRISES LTD.

v.

K. S. INFRASPACE LLP & ANR.

(Civil Appeal No. 7843 of 2019)

OCTOBER 04, 2019

[A. S. BOPANNA AND R. BANUMATHI, JJ.]

Commercial Courts Act, 2015: s. 2(1)(c)(vii) – Commercialdispute – Maintainability of, before the Commercial Court – Onfacts, dispute arising out of an agreement involving an immovableproperty – Suit filed before the Commercial Court – In the suit,the registration of a mortgage deed pertaining to the immovableproperty is sought – High Court held that the immovable propertywas not being used for trade or commerce as such the suit notmaintainable before the Commercial Court – On appeal, held: Itis clear from s. 2(1)(c)(vii) that disputes arising out of agreementsrelating to immovable property used exclusively in trade orcommerce will qualify to be a commercial dispute to be tried byCommercial Courts – On facts, neither the agreement between theparties refers to the nature of the immovable property beingexclusively used for trade or commerce as on the date of theagreement nor is there any pleading to that effect in the plaint –Relief sought in the suit is for execution of the Mortgage Deedwhich is in the nature of specific performance of the terms ofMemorandum of Understanding without reference to nature of theuse of the immovable property in trade or commerce as on the dateof the suit – Thus, the transaction between the parties which is thesubject matter of the suit could not be considered as a “commercialdispute”, so as to enable the Commercial Court to entertain thesuit – Order passed by the High Court is justified – CommercialCourt to return the plaint to the court having jurisdiction.

Objects and reasons – Held: Is to provide speedy disposalof high value commercial disputes – Wider purport and meaningis to be assigned while entertaining the suit and considering thedispute to be a commercial dispute, else the very purpose of theenactment would be defeated.

605

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

[2019] 13 S.C.R.

ADismissing the appeal, the Court

Per A. S. Bopanna, J.

HELD: 1.1 From a perusal of Section 2(1)(c)(vii) of theCommercial Courts Act, 2015 it is noticed that the disputesBarising out of agreements relating to immovable property usedexclusively in trade or commerce will qualify to be a commercialdispute to be tried by Commercial Courts. [Para 6] [614-F-G]

1.2 Even though in the paragraph describing jurisdictionthe plaintiff has stated with regard to the territorial jurisdictionCsince the office and land being at Vadodara, there is no referenceindicating the reason for which the plaintiff pleads that the Courtwhich is the Commercial Court exclusively constituted to try thecommercial disputes has jurisdiction to try the instant suit. Inthat background, a perusal of the prayer made in the plaint wouldessentially indicate that the suit is one seeking for specificDperformance of the terms of MoU whereunder it is agreed thatthe Mortgage Deed be executed. Even if the immovableproperty under the Mortgage Deed was the subject matter itwas necessary to plead and indicate that the same was being usedin trade or commerce due to which the jurisdiction ofECommercial Court is invoked. Without such basic pleadings inthe plaint, any explanations sought to be put forth subsequentlywould only lead to a situation that if an objection is raised, inevery suit a consideration would be required based onextraneous material even to ascertain as to whether the intendedtransaction between the parties was of such nature that it is toFbe construed as a commercial dispute. [Para 9] [616-C-F]

1.3 The statement of objects and reasons with which theCommercial Courts Act, 2015 is enacted so as to providespeedy disposal of high value commercial disputes so as to createthe positive image to the investors world about the independentGand responsive Indian Legal System. A purposive interpretationbe made. A wider purport and meaning is to be assigned whileentertaining the suit and considering the dispute to be acommercial dispute. In view thereof, the very purpose for whichthe CC Act of 2015 has been enacted would be defeated if everyHother suit merely because it is filed before the Commercial Court is entertained. This is for the reason that the suits which arenot actually relating to commercial dispute but being filed merelybecause of the high value and with the intention of seeking earlydisposal would only clog the system and block the way for thegenuine commercial disputes which may have to be entertainedby the Commercial Courts as intended by the law makers. Incommercial disputes as defined a special procedure is providedfor a class of litigation and a strict procedure will have to befollowed to entertain only that class of litigation in thatjurisdiction. If the same is strictly interpreted it is not as if thoseexcluded will be non–suited without any remedy. The excludedclass of litigation will in any event be entertained in the ordinaryCivil Courts wherein the remedy has always existed. [Para 13][620-B-E]

1.4 It is also necessary to carefully examine and entertainonly disputes which actually answers the definition ‘commercialdisputes’ as provided under the Act. In the instant case, neitherthe agreement between the parties refers to the nature of theimmovable property being exclusively used for trade orcommerce as on the date of the agreement nor is there anypleading to that effect in the plaint. Further the very relief soughtin the suit is for execution of the Mortgage Deed which is inthe nature of specific performance of the terms of Memorandumof Understanding without reference to nature of the use of theimmovable property in trade or commerce as on the date of thesuit. Therefore, if all these aspects are kept in view, in thepresent facts the High Court was justified in its conclusionarrived through the order impugned. The Commercial Courtshall therefore return the plaint indicating a date for itspresentation before the Court having jurisdiction. [Para 14] [620-F-H; 621-A]

Vasu Healthcare Private Limited v. Gujarat Akruti TCGBiotech LimitedAIR 2017 Gujarat 153 – approved.

Jagmohan Behl v. State Bank of Indore(2017) SCCOnLine Del 10706 ;Federation of A.P. Chambers ofCommerce & Industry and Ors. v. State of A.P. and Ors.,(2000) 6 SCC 550 : [2000] 2 Suppl. SCR 151 –referred to.

A

B

C

DE

F

G

H

A

BPer Banumathi, J. (Concurring) :

HELD :1.1 In order to fall within Section 2(1)(c)(vii) of theCommercial Courts Act, the immovable property must be “usedexclusively” or “being used exclusively” in trade or commerce.A matter will fall under the jurisdiction of the Commercial CourtCor the Commercial Division of the High Court on the followingfactors: it shall be a commercial dispute within the meaning ofSection 2(1)(c) of the Act; and such commercial disputes are ofa specified value as per Section 2(i) of the Act. [Para 1, 11] [621-C; 626-D-E]D1.2 The Schedule to the Commercial Courts Act amends

D1.2 The Schedule to the Commercial Courts Act amendsvarious provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure and therebymakes significant departure from the Code. After Order XIII ofthe Code, Order XIIIA–”Summary Judgment” has beeninserted. Order XIIIA contains the scope and classes of suitsto which Order XIIIA applies, grounds for summary judgment,Eprocedure to be followed, evidence for hearing of summaryjudgment, orders that may be made by Court in such proceedingsfor summary judgment, etc. After Order XV of the Code, OrderXVA–”Case Management Hearing” has been inserted. OrderXVA provides for first Case Management Hearing (Rule 1);Frecording of oral evidence on a day–to–day basis (Rule 4);powers of the Court in a Case Management Hearing (Rule 6);adjournment of Case Management Hearing (Rule 7);consequences of non–compliance with orders (Rule 8). By wayof amendment, several rules have been incorporated to makethe matters of commercial disputes on fast track. In Order XXGof the Code – “Judgment”, Rule 1 has been substituted thatwithin ninety days of the conclusion of arguments, theCommercial Court/Commercial Division/Commercial AppellateDivision to pronounce the judgment and copies thereof shall beissued to all the parties to the dispute through electronic mailHor otherwise. [Para 19] [629-F-H; 630-A-B]

1.3 Various provisions of the Act namely CaseManagement Hearing and other provisions makes the court toadopt a pro–active approach in resolving the commercial dispute.A new approach for carrying out case management and strictguidelines for completion of the process has been introducedso that the adjudicatory process is not delayed. The trial of thecommercial dispute suits is put on fast track for disposal of thesuits expeditiously. Various provisions of the Act and theamendments inserted to Civil Procedure Code by the Scheduleis to ensure speedy resolution of the commercial disputes in atime bound manner. The intent of the legislature seems to beto have a procedure which expedites the disposal of commercialdisputes and thus creates a positive environment for investmentand development and make India an attractive place to dobusiness. [Para 20] [630-C-E]

1.4 A perusal of the Statement of Objects and Reasons ofthe Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and the various amendmentsto Civil Procedure Code and insertion of new rules to the Codeapplicable to suits of commercial disputes show that it has beenenacted for the purpose of providing an early disposal of highvalue commercial disputes. A purposive interpretation of theObjects and Reasons and various amendments to CivilProcedure Code leaves no room for doubt that the provisionsof the Act require to be strictly construed. If the provisions aregiven a liberal interpretation, the object behind constitution ofCommercial Division of Courts, viz. putting the matter on fasttrack and speedy resolution of commercial disputes, will bedefeated. It is seen from the Statement of Objects and Reasons,that words such as ‘early’ and ‘speedy’ have been incorporatedand reiterated. The object shall be fulfilled only if the provisionsof the Act are interpreted in a narrow sense and not hamperedby the usual procedural delays plaguing our traditional legalsystem. [Para 21] [630-F-H; 631-A]

1.5 A dispute relating to immovable property per se maynot be a commercial dispute. But it becomes a commercialdispute, if it falls under sub–clause (vii) of Section 2(1)(c) of theAct–”the agreements relating to immovable property usedexclusively in trade or commerce”. The words “used exclusivelyin trade or commerce” are to be interpreted purposefully. The AB

C

DEF

G

H

Aword “used” denotes “actually used” and it cannot be either“ready for use” or “likely to be used” or “to be used”. It shouldbe “actually used”. Such a wide interpretation would defeat theobjects of the Act and the fast tracking procedure discussedabove. [Para 22] [631-B-C]

B1.6 On 03.11.2017, a Memorandum of Understanding wasexecuted between the appellant–plaintiff, respondent–defendantand second respondent. As per the terms of MOU, partiesexecuted a Deed of Conveyance of the land. A mortgage deedwas executed simultaneously along with the MOU with respectto the part of the land admeasuring 15,000 sq.ft. in favour of theCplaintiff. It was understood between the parties that respondentNo.1 would apply for change of land use permission for the landin question on signing of the MOU. Mortgage deed wasexecuted by respondent No.1 in favour of the appellant in orderto ensure performance of obligations under the MOU. But thesaid mortgage deed was not presented for registration. [Para 23]D[631-D-E]

1.7 It appears that the trial court has proceeded under thefooting that the parties to the suit more particularly, theappellant–plaintiff seems to be carrying on business as EstateAgent and to manage land, building, etc. and the very object asEenumerated in Memorandum and Articles of Association of theappellant–plaintiff company established that the property inquestion are being used exclusively in trade or commerce ratherin the business of the plaintiff. As rightly pointed out by the HighCourt, there is nothing on record to show that at the time whenagreement to sell came to be executed in 2012, the propertyFwas being exclusively used in trade and commerce so as to bringdispute within the ambit of sub–clause (vii) of Section 2(1)(c) ofthe Act. Merely because, the property is likely to be used inrelation to trade and commerce, the same cannot be the groundto attract the jurisdiction of the Commercial Court. [Para 24]G[631-F-H]

1.9 The object and purpose of the establishment ofCommercial Courts, Commercial Divisions and CommercialAppellate Divisions of the High Court is to ensure that the casesinvolved in commercial disputes are disposed of expeditiously,Hfairly and at reasonable cost to the litigants. Keeping in view the object and purpose of the establishment of the CommercialCourts and fast tracking procedure provided under the Act, thestatutory provisions of the Act and the words incorporatedthereon are to be meaningfully interpreted for quick disposal ofcommercial litigations so as to benefit the litigants especiallythose who are engaged in trade and commerce which in turn willfurther economic growth of the country. [Para 27] [632-H; 633-A-B]

Vasu Healthcare Private Limited v. Gujarat Akruti TCGBiotech Limited & Anr. (2017) SCC Online Guj 724 –

approved.

Ujwala Raje Gaekwar v. Hemaben Achyut Shah(2017) SCC Guj 583 – referred to.

Case Law Reference

(2017) SCC Guj 583referred toPara 25

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 7843of 2019.

From the Judgment and Order dated 01.03.2019 of the HighCourt of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in R/Special Civil Application No. 17868of 2018

Dhruv Mehta, Sr. Adv. Ms. Anushree Prashit Kapadia, AnubhavRay, Ms. Runashree Saikia, Ms. Sonakshi, Advs. for the Appellant.

Deven Parikh, Sr. Adv., Shashvata Shukla, Nikhil Goel,Ms. Naveen Goel, Dushyant Sarna, Piyo Harold, Advs. for theRespondents.

The Judgments of the Court were delivered by

A. S. BOPANNA, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. The appellant herein is the plaintiff in Commercial Court SuitNo. 41/2018 filed before the Commercial Court at Vadodara. Therespondents herein are arrayed as the defendants to the suit. Therespondents on being notified in the suit had appeared and filed thewritten statement inter alia contending that the suit is not maintainableas the dispute involved cannot be termed as a commercial dispute withinthe meaning of Section 2(1)(c) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

A(“CC Act, 2015” for short). In view of such contention, the respondentsherein also filed an application under Order VII Rule 10 of the CivilProcedure Code seeking an order to return the plaint to be presentedin the Court in which the suit should have been instituted. The appellantherein though did not choose to file objection to the said application,had however opposed the same. The application was registered asBExhibit 15 and the learned Judge of the Commercial Court onconsideration had through the order dated 17.10.2018 rejected theapplication. The respondents herein claiming to be aggrieved by the saidorder had approached the High Court of Gujarat in R/Special CivilApplication No.17868/2018. The High Court through a detailed orderCdated 01.03.2019 has allowed the petition, set aside the order dated17.10.2018 passed by the Commercial Court, Vadodara and on allowingthe application filed under Order VII Rule 10 CPC directed that theplaint be returned to the appellant herein to be presented in the Courtin which the suit should have been instituted. The appellant herein,therefore, claiming to be aggrieved by the order dated 01.03.2019 isDbefore this Court in this appeal.

3. The brief facts which led to the present situation is that theappellant herein executed an agreement to sell dated 14.02.2012 infavour of the respondent No. 2 in respect of the land which is describedin the agreement. The respondent No. 2 assigned and transferred allEhis rights under the said agreement to sell in favour of respondent No.1by executing an assignment deed dated 12.10.2017. In that view, therespondent No. 1 herein was to purchase the lands which were thesubject matter of the agreement from the appellant herein. Accordingly,the sale was made under a Deed of Conveyance dated 03.11.2017.FSince certain other aspects were to be completed regarding the changerelating to the nature of the use of the land for conclusion of thetransaction, the right of the appellant in respect of the land was to beprotected. In that view a Memorandum of Understanding dated03.11.2017 was entered into between the appellant and the respondentsGherein. As per the same, a Mortgage Deed was required to beexecuted by respondent No. 1 herein in favour of the appellant.

4. Accordingly, a Mortgage Deed dated 03.11.2017 was executedbut the same had not been registered. It is in that light the appellantherein filed the Commercial Civil Suit No. 41/2018 so as to enforceHthe execution of a Mortgage Deed. Consequently, the relief of

permanent injunction and other related reliefs were sought. It is in thesaid suit, summon was issued to respondents herein who are thedefendants in the suit, wherein on filing the written statement theapplication under Order VII Rule 10 of CPC was filed. TheCommercial Court while rejecting the application had referred to theMemorandum and Articles of Association of the appellant company andin that light taking note of the business that they were entitled toundertake has arrived at the conclusion that the plaintiff seems to becarrying on the business as an estate agent and in that circumstancehas further arrived at its conclusion that it is a commercial dispute. TheHigh Court on the other hand had found fault with the manner in whichthe Commercial Court had rested its consideration on the Memorandumand Articles of Association and had examined the matter in detail tocome to a conclusion that the immovable property in the instant casewas not being used for trade or commerce. In that regard, the legalposition enunciated by the various decisions was referred to and hadaccordingly directed the return of the plaint to be presented in anappropriate Court which is assailed herein.

5. We have heard Shri Dhruv Mehta, learned senior advocatefor the appellant, Shri Deven Parikh, learned senior advocate for therespondents and perused the appeal papers.

6. At the outset, it is noticed that the consideration required inthe instant case is as to whether the transaction between the partiesherein which is the subject matter of the suit could be considered as a“commercial dispute” so as to enable the Commercial Court to entertainthe suit. In that regard, it is necessary to take note of Section 2(1)(c)(vii)of the CC Act, 2015. The said provision to the extent relevant isextracted here below for reference.

“Sec.2(1)In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,- (a) xxx (b) xxx

(c) “commercial dispute” means a dispute arising out of –

(i) xxx

(ii) xxx(iii) xxx

AB

CD

E

F

G

H

A(iv) xxx

(v) xxx

(vi) xxx

(vii) agreements relating to immovable property usedBexclusively in trade or commerce;

(viii) xxx

(ix) xxx

(x) xxx

C

(xi) xxx

(xii) xxx

(xiii) xxx

(xiv) xxx

D

(xv) xxx

(xvi) xxx

(xvii) xxx

(xviii) xxx

E

(xix) xxx

(xx) xxx

(xxi) xxx(xxii) xxx

F

From a perusal, of the provision relied upon by the learned senioradvocates it is noticed that the disputes arising out of agreements relatingto immovable property used exclusively in trade or commerce willqualify to be a commercial dispute to be tried by Commercial Courts.GThe question therefore would be that, in the instant case though theparties have entered into a sale transaction of the immovable propertyand presently in the suit the registration of a Mortgage Deed pertainingto the immovable property is sought, whether the immovable propertyinvolved could be considered as being used exclusively in trade orHcommerce.

7. The learned senior advocate for the appellant has madedetailed submissions referring to the documents to contend that theappellant was running an industry in the land concerned which wasacquired for that purpose and presently the respondent No.1 haspurchased the same for developing the said land and in that view theland is one which is used for trade and commerce. The learned senioradvocate for the respondents on the other hand has contended to thecontrary that the appellant had ceased to function for the past severalyears and the company being defunct, the land involved was not beingused for trade or commerce and even though the respondent No.1 hassought for change of land use and to develop the land, the same wouldbe subject to such change of land use that would be granted and theuse to which it would be put in future. Hence it is contended that ason the date of transaction the land is not being used for trade orcommerce and a suit at present would not be maintainable before theCommercial Court.

8. Though such rival contentions are put forth by the learnedsenior advocate on either side, these aspects cannot be dealt with inabstract. Instead the nature of the dispute and the jurisdiction to trythe same is to be reflected in the suit itself since in a civil suit thepleadings, namely averments in the plaint would at the outset be relevantto confer jurisdiction. Hence before adverting to the other aspects itwould be necessary to carefully examine the plaint. The plaintiff hasin detail referred to the nature of the transaction between the appellantand the respondents herein. In para 5 thereof the detail of the landbearing R.S. No.122 corresponding to City Survey No.1101 and 1100/1 having land area of 9207 square metres at Mouje Subhanpura Reg.District, Vadodara is referred. Further the schedule of the property isindicated in para 6 and reference is made to the Memorandum ofUnderstanding where again the reference is made to the land. It isaverred therein that it would be the total responsibility of the respondentNo.1 herein (defendant No.2 in the suit) to change the land use as wellas to pay the amount that may be required for the permission. Theamount to be paid as premium is referred and the right of the plaintiffto secure the Mortgage Deed in view of the terms of the MoU is stated.In the entire plaint there is no reference to the nature of the land orthe type of use to which it was being put as on the date of theAgreement to Sell/Sale Deed/Memorandum of Understanding or as onthe date of the suit.

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

A9. Further on referring to the cause of action in para 21, theplaintiff has thereafter referred in para 22 to the jurisdiction of the Courtto hear and decide the matter. It would be appropriate to extract thesame which reads as hereunder:

“22.Jurisdiction: The Plaintiff states that the Defendants havingBtheir office at Vadodara land which is the subject matter of theinstant suit is situated within the territorial jurisdiction of thisHon’ble Court and hence this Hon’ble Court has the jurisdictionto hear and decide the matter.”

Even though in the paragraph describing jurisdiction the plaintiffChas stated with regard to the territorial jurisdiction since the office andland being at Vadodara, there is no reference indicating the reason forwhich the plaintiff pleads that the Court which is the Commercial Courtexclusively constituted to try the commercial disputes has jurisdictionto try the instant suit. In that background, a perusal of the prayer madein the plaint would essentially indicate that the suit is one seeking forDspecific performance of the terms of MoU whereunder it is agreed thatthe Mortgage Deed be executed. Even if the immovable property underthe Mortgage Deed was the subject matter it was necessary to pleadand indicate that the same was being used in trade or commerce dueto which the jurisdiction of Commercial Court is invoked. Without suchEbasic pleadings in the plaint, any explanations sought to be put forthsubsequently would only lead to a situation that if an objection is raised,in every suit a consideration would be required based on extraneousmaterial even to ascertain as to whether the intended transactionbetween the parties was of such nature that it is to be construed as acommercial dispute.F

10. Be that as it may, the learned senior advocates on both sideshave sought to rely on the legal position decided by the various HighCourts in the absence of the pronouncement of this Court. The learnedsenior advocate in that regard have referred to the various decisionson the same point. However, we do not find it appropriate to refer toGeach of them and over burden this order since we notice that the HighCourt in fact has referred to various decisions while deciding the instantcase and has thereafter arrived at its conclusion. The discussion asmade by the High Court with reference to the various decisions is alsojustified. In that view, we would refer to the decision of a DivisionHBench in the case of Jagmohan Behlvs.State Bank of Indore, 2017

SCC OnLine Del 10706 relied on by the learned senior advocate forthe appellant. In that regard, it is noticed that in the said case on takingnote of the provision contained in Clause 2(1)(c)(vii) of the CC Act,2015 it is held that the dispute involved therein would constitute acommercial dispute and the expression “arising out of” and “in relationto immovable property” should not be given the narrow and restrictedmeaning and the expression would include all matters relatingagreements in connection with the immovable properties. The saidconclusion reached was in a circumstance where the immovableproperty in question was undoubtedly being used for a trade orcommerce and it was held so when the claim in the suit is for recoveryof rent or mesne profit, security deposit etc. for the use of suchimmovable property.

11. On the other hand, the learned senior advocate for therespondents has relied on the decision of a Division Bench of the GujaratHigh Court in the case of Vasu Healthcare Private Limited vs.Gujarat Akruti TCG Biotech Limited, AIR 2017 Gujarat 153 whereina detailed consideration has been made and the conclusion reachedtherein by taking note of an earlier decision is that on a plain readingof Clause 2(1)(c) of CC Act, 2015 the expression “used” must mean“actually used” or “being used”. It is further explained that if the intentionof the legislature was to expand the scope, in that case the phraseology“likely to be used” or “to be used” would have been employed. Theverbatim consideration therein is as hereunder;

“Therefore, if the dispute falls within any of the clause 2(c) thedispute can be said to be “commercial dispute” for which theCommercial Court would have jurisdiction. It is required to benoted that before the learned Commercial Court the originalplaintiff relied upon section 2(c)(i), 2(c)(ii) and 2(c)(xx) of theCommercial Courts Act only. Learned Counsel appearing onbehalf of the original plaintiff has candidly admitted and/orconceded that the case shall not fall within clause 2(c)(i); 2(c)(ii)or 2(c)(xx) of the Commercial Courts Act. It is required to benoted that before the learned Commercial Court it was neverthe case on behalf of the original plaintiff that case would fallwithin section 2(c)(vii) of the learned Commercial Court. Despitethe above we have considered on merits whether evenconsidering section 2(c)(vii) of the Commercial Courts Act, the A

B

C

D

E

FG

H

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

dispute between the parties can be said to be “commercialdispute” within the definition of section 2(c) of the CommercialCourts Act or not? Considering section 2(c)(vii), “commercialdispute” means a dispute arising out of the agreements relatingto immovable property used exclusively in trade orcommerce. As observed hereinabove, at the time of filing of thesuit and even so pleaded in the plaint, the immovable property/plots the agreements between the parties cannot be said to beagreements relating to immovable property used exclusivelyin trade or commerce. As per the agreement between the partyafter getting the plots on lease from the GIDC, the same wasrequired to be thereafter developed by the original defendant No.1 and after providing all infrastructural facilities and sub-plottingit, the same is required to be given to other persons like theoriginal plaintiff. It is the case on behalf of the original plaintiffthat as the original defendant No. 1 has failed to provide anyinfrastructural facilities and develop the plots and therefore, a civilsuit for specific performance of the agreement has been filed.There are other alternative prayers also. Therefore, it cannot besaid that the agreement is as such relating to immovable propertyused exclusively in trade or commerce. It is the case on behalfof the original plaintiff that as in clause (vii) of section 2(c), thepharseology used is not “actually used” or “being used” andtherefore, even if at present the plot is not used and even if it islikely to be used even in future, in that case also, section 2(c)(vii)shall be applicable and therefore, the Commercial Court wouldhave jurisdiction. The aforesaid has no substance. As per thecardinal principle of law while interpreting a particular statute orthe provision, the literal and strict interpretation has to be applied.It may be noted that important words used in the relevantprovisions are “immovable property used exclusively in tradeor commerce”. If the submission on behalf of the originalplaintiff is accepted in that case it would be adding something inthe statute which is not there in the statute, which is notpermissible. On plain reading of the relevant clause it is clearthat the expression “used” must mean “actually used” or “beingused”. If the intention of the legislature was to expand the scope,in that case the phraseology used would have been different asfor example, “likely to be used” or “to be used”. The word “used”

denotes “actually used” and it cannot be said to be either “readyfor use” or “likely to be used”; or “to be used”. Similar viewhas been taken by the Bombay High Court (Nagpur Bench) inthe case of Dineshkumar Gulabchand Agrawal (Supra) and itis observed and held that the word “used” denotes “actuallyused” and not merely “ready for use”. It is reported that SLPagainst the said decision has been dismissed by the Hon’bleSupreme Court.”

12. Though we are informed that the said decision is assailedbefore this Court in a Special Leave Petition we are inclined to agreewith the view expressed therein. This is for the reason that this Courtwhile examining the issue relating to exclusive land use, though in thedifferent context has laid emphasis on the present user of the land eitherfor agriculture or non-agriculture purpose being relevant. In that regard,the decision relied on by the learned senior advocate for the respondentin the case of Federation of A.P. Chambers of Commerce & Industryand Ors. vs. State of A.P. and Ors., (2000) 6 SCC 550 is noticed,wherein it is observed as under:

“6.Section 3 of the said Act speaks of “land is used for anyindustrial purpose”, “land is used for any commercial purpose”and “land is used for any other non-agricultural purpose”. Theemphasis is on the word “is used”. For the purpose of levy ofassessment on non-agricultural lands at the rate specified in theSchedule for land used for industrial purposes, therefore, therehas to be a finding as a fact that the land is in fact in praesentiin use for an industrial purpose. The same would apply to acommercial purpose or any other non-agricultural purpose.”

“9.We are in no doubt whatever, therefore, that it is only landwhich is actually in use for an industrial purpose as defined inthe said Act that can be assessed to non-agricultural assessmentat the rate specified for land used for industrial purposes. Thewider meaning given to the word “used” in the judgment underchallenge is untenable. Having regard to the fact that the saidAct is a taxing statute, no Court is justified in imputing to thelegislature an intention that it has not clearly expressed in thelanguage it has employed.”

(emphasis supplied)

AB

C

D

E

F

G

H

A13. The learned senior advocate for the appellant would however,contend that a strict interpretation as in the case of taxing statutes wouldnot be appropriate in the instant case where the issue relates tojurisdiction. In that regard, the learned senior advocate has referred tothe statement of objects and reasons with which the Commercial CourtsAct, 2015 is enacted so as to provide speedy disposal of high valueBcommercial disputes so as to create the positive image to the investorsworld about the independent and responsive Indian Legal System.Hence, he contends that a purposive interpretation be made. It iscontended that a wider purport and meaning is to be assigned whileentertaining the suit and considering the dispute to be a commercialCdispute. Having taken note of the submission we feel that the verypurpose for which the CC Act of 2015 has been enacted would bedefeated if every other suit merely because it is filed before theCommercial Court is entertained. This is for the reason that the suitswhich are not actually relating to commercial dispute but being filedmerely because of the high value and with the intention of seeking earlyDdisposal would only clog the system and block the way for the genuinecommercial disputes which may have to be entertained by theCommercial Courts as intended by the law makers. In commercialdisputes as defined a special procedure is provided for a class oflitigation and a strict procedure will have to be followed to entertainEonly that class of litigation in that jurisdiction. If the same is strictlyinterpreted it is not as if those excluded will be non-suited without anyremedy. The excluded class of litigation will in any event be entertainedin the ordinary Civil Courts wherein the remedy has always existed.

14. In that view it is also necessary to carefully examine andFentertain only disputes which actually answers the definition “commercialdisputes” as provided under the Act. In the instant case, as alreadytaken note neither the agreement between the parties refers to thenature of the immovable property being exclusively used for trade orcommerce as on the date of the agreement nor is there any pleading to that effect in the plaint. Further the very relief sought in the suit isGfor execution of the Mortgage Deed which is in the nature of specificperformance of the terms of Memorandum of Understanding withoutreference to nature of the use of the immovable property in trade orcommerce as on the date of the suit. Therefore, if all these aspectsare kept in view, we are of the opinion that in the present facts theHHigh Court was justified in its conclusion arrived through the order dated

01.03.2019 impugned herein. The Commercial Court shall thereforereturn the plaint indicating a date for its presentation before the Courthaving jurisdiction.

15. Accordingly, the instant appeal being devoid of merit standsdismissed, with no order as to costs.

R. BANUMATHI, J.

1. I have gone through the judgment of my esteemed BrotherJustice A.S. Bopanna. I am in full agreement with the conclusion thatin order to fall within Section 2(1)(c)(vii) of the Commercial Courts Act,the immovable property must be “used exclusively” or “being usedexclusively” in trade or commerce. However, in view of the importanceof the question involved, I would like to give my reasonings forconcurring with the conclusion of my esteemed Brother.

2. The Commercial Courts, Commercial Division andCommercial Appellate Division of High Courts Act, 2015 (Act No.4 of2016) published in the Gazette of India on 01.01.2016. The Act isdeemed to have come into force w.e.f. 23.10.2015. The Act No.4 of2016 was amended by Central Act 28 of 2018 – The CommercialCourts Act.

3. We may refer to the Law Commission’s 253[rd] Report, whichinter alia made various recommendations. Para (4.2) of Chapter IV-”Conclusions and Summary of Recommendations” of LawCommission’s 253[rd] Report reads as under:- “4.2 The Commercial Courts, the Commercial Divisions and theCommercial Appellate Divisions of High Courts that have beenrecommended are intended to serve as a pilot project in the largergoal of reforming the civil justice system in India. The goal is toensure that cases are disposed of expeditiously, fairly and atreasonable cost to the litigant. Not only does this benefit thelitigant, other potential litigants (especially those engaged in tradeand commerce) are also advantaged by the reduction in backlogcaused by the quick resolution of commercial disputes. In turn,this will further economic growth, increase foreign investment,and make India an attractive place to do business. Further, it alsobenefits the economy as a whole given that a robust dispute A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

[2019] 13 S.C.R.

Aresolution mechanism is a sine qua non for the all-rounddevelopment of an economy”.[1]

After Law Commission’s 253[rd] Report, the Act No.4 of 2016 wasamended by Central Act 28 of 2018.

4. Section 3 of the Act deals with Constitution of CommercialBCourts. As per Section 3 of the Act, the State Government shall, afterconsultation with the High Court, by notification, constitute CommercialCourts at District level if deemed necessary for the purpose ofexercising jurisdiction under the Act. As per Section 3(1A) of the Act,Commercial Courts shall have jurisdiction to try the commercial disputesCof a “Specified Value” which shall not be less than three lakh rupeesor such higher value, for whole or part of the State, as it may considernecessary. After amendment in 2018, proviso to Section 3 provides thatCommercial Courts may be constituted with respect to area over whichthe High Courts have ordinary original civil jurisdiction. Section 5(1) of

the Act provides for the constitution of Commercial Appellate DivisionDhaving one or more Division Benches for the purpose of exercisingjurisdiction and powers conferred on it by the Act.5. Section 6 deals with the jurisdiction of Commercial Court.Section 6 of the Act reads as under:- E“6. Jurisdiction of Commercial Court. - The CommercialCourt shall have jurisdiction to try all suits and applications relatingto a commercial dispute of a Specified Value arising out of theentire territory of the State over which it has been vestedterritorial jurisdiction.

FExplanation. – For the purposes of this section, a commercialdispute shall be considered to arise out of the entire territory ofthe State over which a Commercial Court has been vestedjurisdiction, if the suit or application relating to such commercialdispute has been instituted as per the provisions of sections 16to 20 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908)”.G

6. Section 7 deals with the jurisdiction of Commercial Divisionsof High Courts. Section 7 of the Act reads as under:- 1 See Para (4.2) of Chapter-IV-‘Conclusions and Summary of Recommendations’ ofLaw Commission’s 253rd Report – Commercial Division and Commercial AppellateHDivision of High Courts and Commercial Courts Bill, 2015.

“7. Jurisdiction of Commercial Divisions of High Courts.– All suits and applications relating to commercial disputes of aSpecified Value filed in a High Court having ordinary original civiljurisdiction shall be heard and disposed of by the CommercialDivision of that High Court:

Provided that all suits and applications relating to commercialdisputes, stipulated by an Act to lie in a court not inferior to aDistrict Court, and filed or pending on the original side of theHigh Court, shall be heard and disposed of by the CommercialDivision of the High Court:

Provided further that all suits and applications transferred to theHigh Court by virtue of sub-section (4) of section 22 of theDesigns Act, 2000 (16 of 2000) or section 104 of the PatentsAct, 1970 (39 of 1970) shall be heard and disposed of by theCommercial Division of the High Court in all the areas overwhich the High Court exercises ordinary original civil jurisdiction”.

7. Commercial Divisions are to be set up in High Courts that arealready having ordinary original civil jurisdiction having one or moreBenches consisting of a Single Judge having experience in dealing withcommercial disputes for exercising powers under the Act. As perSection 7(1) and the proviso thereto, Commercial Division will hear anddispose of all suits and applications relating to commercial disputes ofa specified value, that lie in a court not inferior to district court andfiled in a High Court having ordinary original civil jurisdiction and alsothose cases transferred to High Court under Section 22(4) of theDesigns Act, 2000 or under Section 104 of the Patents Act, 1970.

8. Section 5 of the Act deals with the Constitution of CommercialAppellate Division. Section 5(1) of the Act reads as under:- “5. Constitution of Commercial Appellate Division. – (1)

After issuing notification under sub-section (1) of section 3 ororder under sub-section (1) of section 4, the Chief Justice of theconcerned High Court shall, by order, constitute CommercialAppellate Division having one or more Division Benches for thepurpose of exercising the jurisdiction and powers conferred onit by the Act.

………”

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

In terms of Section 5(2) of the Act, the Chief Justice of the HighCourt shall nominate such Judges of the High Court who haveexperience in dealing with commercial disputes to be Judges of theCommercial Appellate Division.

9. Section 2(1)(c) defines “commercial dispute” as under:- “2. Definitions. - (1) In this Act, useless the context otherwiserequires,-

……….

(c) “Commercial dispute” means a dispute arising out of-

(i) ordinary transaction of merchants, bankers, financiers andtraders such as those relating to mercantile documents,including enforcement and interpretation of suchdocuments;

(ii) export or import of merchandise or services;

(iii) issues relating to admiralty and maritime law;

(iv) transactions relating to aircraft, aircraft engines, aircraftequipment and helicopters, including sales, leasing andfinancing of the same;

(v) carriage of goods;

(vi) construction and infrastructure contracts, includingtenders;

(vii) agreements relating to immovable property usedexclusively in trade or commerce;

(viii) franchising agreements;

(ix) distribution and licensing agreements;

(x) management and consultancy agreements;

(xi) joint venture agreements;

(xii) shareholders agreements;

(xiii) subscription and investment agreements pertaining to theservices industry including outsourcing services andfinancial services;

(xiv) mercantile agency and mercantile usage;

(xv) partnership agreements;

(xvi) technology development agreement;

(xvii) intellectual property rights relating to registered andunregistered trademarks, copyright, patent, design,domain names, geographical indications andsemiconductor integrated circuits;

(xviii) agreements for sale of goods or provision of services;

(xix) exploitation of oil and gas reserves or other naturalresource including electromagnetic spectrum;

(xx) insurance and re-insurance;

(xxi) contract of agency relating to any of the above; and

(xxii) such other commercial disputes as may be notified bythe Central Government.Explanation.- A commercial dispute shall not cease to becommercial dispute merely because- (a) it also involves action for recovery of immovable propertyor for realising of monies out of immovable property givenas security or involves any other relief pertaining toimmovable property; (b) one of the contracting parties is the State or any of itsagencies or instrumentalities, or a private body carrying outpublic functions; (d) “Commercial Division” means the Commercial Division ina High Court constituted under sub-section (1) of section4; (e) “District Judge” shall have the same meaning as assignedto it in clause (a) of Article 236 of the Constitution of India:

(f) “Document” means any mater expressed or described uponany substance by means of letters, figures or marks, orelectronic means, or by more than one of those means,intended to be used, or which may be used, for the purposeof recording that matters; (g) “Notification” means a notification published in the OfficialGazette and the expression “notify” with its cognatemeanings and grammatical variations shall be construedaccordingly; A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

A(h) “schedule” means the Schedule appended to the Act; and

(i) “Specified Value”, in relation to a commercial dispute, shallmean the value of the subject matter in respect of a suit asdetermined in accordance with section 12 [which shall notbe less than three lakh rupees] or such higher value, asBmay be notified by the Central Government.”[Subs. by Act 28 of 2018, sec. 4(II), for “which shall notbe less than one crore rupees” (w.r.e.f. 3-5-2018)].

10. As noted above, clause (i) of Section 2 of the Act definesC“Specified Value”, in relation to a commercial dispute, shall mean thevalue of the subject matter in respect of a suit as determined inaccordance with section 12 [which shall not be less than three lakhrupees] or such higher value, as may be notified by the CentralGovernment”. Section 12 provides for criteria for valuation of the suit,application or appeal for the purpose of the Act.D

11. A matter will fall under the jurisdiction of the CommercialCourt or the Commercial Division of the High Court on the followingfactors:-

(i) it shall be a commercial dispute within the meaning ofESection 2(1)(c) of the Act; and

(ii) such commercial disputes are of a specified value as perSection 2(i) of the Act.

12. As per Section 11 of the Act, notwithstanding anythingcontained in the Act, a Commercial Court or a Commercial DivisionFshall not entertain or decide any suit relating to any commercial disputein respect of which the jurisdiction of the civil court is either expresslyor impliedly barred under any other law for the time being in force.

13. Section 15 of the Act deals with transfer of pending cases.Section 15 of the Act reads as under:-G

“–15. Transfer of pending cases. (1) All suits and applications,including applications under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,1996 (26 of 1996), relating to a commercial dispute of SpecifiedValue pending in a High Court where a Commercial Division hasHbeen constituted, shall be transferred to the Commercial Division.

(2) All suits and applications, including applications under theArbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (26 of 1996), relating to acommercial dispute of a Specified Value pending in any civil courtin any district or area in respect of which a Commercial Courthas been constituted, shall be transferred to such CommercialCourt:

Provided that no suit or application where the final judgment hasbeen reserved by the Court prior to the constitution of theCommercial Division or the Commercial Court shall betransferred either under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2).

………”.

14. Insofar as transferred cases, as per Section 15(4) of the Act,the Commercial Division or Commercial Court shall prescribe newtimelines or issue further directions for speedy and efficacious disposalof such suit or application in accordance with Order XVA of the Codeof Civil Procedure. New time period for filing written statement shallbe prescribed and the proviso to sub-rule (1) of rule 1 of Order V ofthe Code of Civil Procedure shall not apply to the transferred casesand the Court may, in its discretion, prescribe a new time period withinwhich the written statement shall be filed.

15. The preamble of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 reads asunder:- “An Act to provide for the constitution of Commercial Courts,Commercial Appellate Courts, Commercial Division andCommercial Appellate Division in the High Courts foradjudicating commercial disputes of specified value andmatters connected therewith or incidental thereto.”

16. The Statement of Objects and Reasons of the CommercialCourts Act reads as under:- “Statement of Objects and Reasons The proposal to provide for speedy disposal of high valuecommercial disputes has been under consideration of theGovernment for quite some time. The high value commercialdisputes involve complex facts and question of law. Therefore,there is a need to provide for an independent mechanism for theirearly resolution. Early resolution of commercial disputes shall A

B

C

D

E

F

GH

Issues

Acreate a positive image to the investor world about theindependent and responsive Indian legal system.

……….

6. It is proposed to introduce the Commercial Courts, CommercialDivision and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Bill,B2015 to replace the Commercial Courts, Commercial Division andCommercial Appellate Division of High Courts Ordinance, 2015which inter alia, provides for the following namely:-

(i) constitution of the Commercial Courts at District levelexcept for the territory over which any High Court is havingordinary original civil jurisdiction; C

(ii) constitution of the Commercial Divisions in those HighCourts which are already exercising ordinary civil jurisdictionand they shall have territorial jurisdiction over such areasDon which it has original jurisdiction;

(iii) constitution of the Commercial Appellate Division in all theHigh Courts to hear the appeals against the Orders of theCommercial Courts and the Orders of the CommercialDivision of the High Court; E

(iv) the minimum pecuniary jurisdiction of such CommercialCourts and Commercial Division is proposed as one crorerupees; and

(v) to amend the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 as applicableto the Commercial Courts and Commercial Divisions whichFshall prevail over the existing High Courts Rules and otherprovisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 so as toimprove the efficiency and reduce delays in disposal ofcommercial cases.

……...”

G

The object and purpose of Commercial Courts Act is to ensurethat the Commercial Courts, Commercial Appellate Courts, CommercialDivision and Commercial Appellate Division of the High Courts disposeof commercial cases expeditiously, fairly and at reasonable cost to theHlitigant.

17. Section 13 deals with appeals from decrees of CommercialCourts and Commercial Divisions. As per Section 14 of the Act, theCommercial Appellate Court and the Commercial Appellate Divisionshall endeavour to dispose of appeals filed before it within a period ofsix months from the date of filing of such appeal.

Fast Track Procedure for deciding the Commercial Disputes

18. As per Section 16 of the Act, the provisions of the Code ofCivil Procedure as amended under the Act, shall apply in the trial ofsuit in respect of a commercial dispute of a specified value. Section 16of the Act reads as under:- “16. Amendments to the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908in its application to commercial disputes. – (1) Theprovisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908) shall,in their application to any suit in respect of a commercial disputeof a Specified Value, stand amended in the manner as specifiedin the Schedule.

(2) The Commercial Division and Commercial Court shall followthe provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908),as amended by this Act, in the trial of a suit in respect of acommercial dispute of a Specified Value.

(3) Where any provision of any rule of the jurisdictional HighCourt or any amendment to the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908(5 of 1908), by the State Government is in conflict with theprovisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), asamended by this Act, the provisions of the Code of CivilProcedure as amended by this Act shall prevail”.

19. The Schedule to the Commercial Courts Act amends variousprovisions of the Code of Civil Procedure and thereby makes significantdeparture from the Code. After Order XIII of the Code, Order XIIIA- “Summary Judgment” has been inserted. Order XIIIA contains thescope and classes of suits to which Order XIIIA applies, grounds forsummary judgment, procedure to be followed, evidence for hearing ofsummary judgment, orders that may be made by Court in suchproceedings for summary judgment, etc. After Order XV of the Code,Order XVA–”Case Management Hearing” has been inserted. OrderXVA provides for first Case Management Hearing (Rule 1); recordingof oral evidence on a day-to-day basis (Rule 4); powers of the Court A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

Ain a Case Management Hearing (Rule 6); adjournment of CaseManagement Hearing (Rule 7); consequences of non-compliance withorders (Rule 8). By way of amendment, several rules have beenincorporated to make the matters of commercial disputes on fast track.In Order XX of the Code – “Judgment”, Rule 1 has been substituted that within ninety days of the conclusion of arguments, the CommercialBCourt/Commercial Division/Commercial Appellate Division to pronouncethe judgment and copies thereof shall be issued to all the parties to thedispute through electronic mail or otherwise.

20. Various provisions of the Act namely Case ManagementHearing and other provisions makes the court to adopt a pro-activeCapproach in resolving the commercial dispute. A new approach forcarrying out case management and strict guidelines for completion ofthe process has been introduced so that the adjudicatory process is notdelayed. I have referred to the various provisions of the Act and theSchedule bringing in amendments brought to the Civil Procedure CodeDto deal with the commercial disputes, only to highlight that the trial ofthe commercial dispute suits is put on fast track for disposal of the suitsexpeditiously. Various provisions of the Act referred to above and theamendments inserted to Civil Procedure Code by the Schedule is toensure speedy resolution of the commercial disputes in a time boundmanner. The intent of the legislature seems to be to have a procedureEwhich expedites the disposal of commercial disputes and thus createsa positive environment for investment and development and make Indiaan attractive place to do business.

21. A perusal of the Statement of Objects and Reasons of theCommercial Courts Act, 2015 and the various amendments to CivilFProcedure Code and insertion of new rules to the Code applicable tosuits of commercial disputes show that it has been enacted for thepurpose of providing an early disposal of high value commercial disputes.A purposive interpretation of the Objects and Reasons and variousamendments to Civil Procedure Code leaves no room for doubt thatthe provisions of the Act require to be strictly construed. If the provisionsGare given a liberal interpretation, the object behind constitution ofCommercial Division of Courts, viz. putting the matter on fast trackand speedy resolution of commercial disputes, will be defeated. If wetake a closer look at the Statement of Objects and Reasons, words suchas ‘early’ and ‘speedy’ have been incorporated and reiterated. TheHobject shall be fulfilled only if the provisions of the Act are interpreted in a narrow sense and not hampered by the usual procedural delaysplaguing our traditional legal system.

22. A dispute relating to immovable property per se may not bea commercial dispute. But it becomes a commercial dispute, if it fallsunder sub-clause (vii) of Section 2(1)(c) of the Act viz. “theagreements relating to immovable property used exclusively in tradeor commerce”. The words “used exclusively in trade or commerce”are to be interpreted purposefully. The word “used” denotes “actuallyused” and it cannot be either “ready for use” or “likely to be used” or“to be used”. It should be “actually used”. Such a wide interpretationwould defeat the objects of the Act and the fast tracking procedurediscussed above.

23. On 03.11.2017, a Memorandum of Understanding wasexecuted between the appellant-plaintiff, respondent-defendant andKetan Bhailalbhai Shah-second respondent. As per the terms of MOU,parties executed a Deed of Conveyance of the land. A mortgage deedwas executed simultaneously along with the MOU with respect to thepart of the land admeasuring 15,000 sq.ft. in favour of the plaintiff. Itwas understood between the parties that respondent No.1 would applyfor change of land use permission for the land in question on signing ofthe MOU. Mortgage deed was executed by respondent No.1 in favourof the appellant in order to ensure performance of obligations underthe MOU. But the said mortgage deed was not presented forregistration.

24. It appears that the trial court has proceeded under the footingthat the parties to the suit more particularly, the appellant-plaintiff seemsto be carrying on business as Estate Agent and to manage land, building,etc. and the very object as enumerated in Memorandum and Articlesof Association of the appellant-plaintiff company established that theproperty in question are being used exclusively in trade or commercerather in the business of the plaintiff. As rightly pointed out by the HighCourt, there is nothing on record to show that at the time whenagreement to sell came to be executed in 2012, the property was beingexclusively used in trade and commerce so as to bring dispute withinthe ambit of sub-clause (vii) of Section 2(1)(c) of the Act. Merelybecause, the property is likely to be used in relation to trade andcommerce, the same cannot be the ground to attract the jurisdiction ofthe Commercial Court.

A

BC

DE

F

G

H

A25. In the case of Ujwala Raje Gaekwar v. Hemaben AchyutShah 2017 SCC Guj 583, a Special Civil Suit No.533/2011 was institutedfor declaration that the sale deed valued at Rs.17.76 crores executedby the appellant-original defendant No.1 in favour of respondent No.4be declared illegal and also, for permanent injunction with respect toBthe land in question. The appellants-defendants thereon filed anapplication that in sale deed, it has been clearly mentioned that theagreement relating to immovable property used exclusively in trade orcommerce and falls within the meaning of Section 2(1)(c)(vii) of theCommercial Courts Act and that the matters above, the value of rupees one crore are to be transferred to the Commercial Court. Trial courtCrejected the said application which was challenged before the GujaratHigh Court. The Gujarat High Court held that the aim, object and purposeof establishment of Commercial Courts, Commercial Divisions andCommercial Appellate Divisions of the High Court is to ensure that thecases involved in commercial disputes are disposed of expeditiously,Dfairly and at reasonable cost to the litigant, and if such a suit which isas such arising out of the probate proceedings and/or is dispute withrespect to the property are transferred to the Commercial Division/Commercial Court, there shall not be any difference between theRegular Civil Courts and the Commercial Division/Commercial Courtsand the object for the establishment of the Commercial Division/ECommercial Courts shall be frustrated.

26. In Vasu Healthcare Private Limited v. Gujarat Akruti TCGBiotch Limited & Another 2017 SCC OnLine Guj 724, referred to inextenso by my learned Brother, it was held that “on plain reading ofthe relevant clause, it is clear that the expression “used” must meanF“actually used” or “being used”. If the intention of the legislaturewas to expand the scope, in that case the phraseology used wouldhave been different as for example, “likely to be used” or “to beused”. The word “used” denotes “actually used” and it cannot besaid to be either “ready for use” or “likely to be used”; or “to beGused”. We entirely agree with the above purposive interpretationadopted by the Gujarat High Court.

27. The object and purpose of the establishment of CommercialCourts, Commercial Divisions and Commercial Appellate Divisions ofthe High Court is to ensure that the cases involved in commercialHdisputes are disposed of expeditiously, fairly and at reasonable cost to the litigants. Keeping in view the object and purpose of the establishmentof the Commercial Courts and fast tracking procedure provided underthe Act, the statutory provisions of the Act and the words incorporatedthereon are to be meaningfully interpreted for quick disposal ofcommercial litigations so as to benefit the litigants especially those whoare engaged in trade and commerce which in turn will further economicgrowth of the country. On the above reasonings, I agree with theconclusion arrived at by my esteemed brother Justice A.S. Bopanna.

Nidhi Jain

Appeal dismissed.

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H