VEENA BAHL Vs. MANMOHAN BAHL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants/plaintiffs are aggrieved by the order dated 14.1.2016 passed by the learned Joint Registrar, transferring the present suit to the court of the learned District Judge, South-East District, Saket Court Complex, New Delhi, in terms of the Notification dated 24.11.2015, issued under Sec. 4 of the Delhi High Court(Amendment) Act, 2015 (in short 'the amendment Act').

(2.) The ground for laying a challenge to the aforesaid order of transfer is that the learned Joint Registrar had failed to appreciate the concept of 'specified value', as mentioned in Sec. 12 of the Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Act, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Commercial Courts Act'), that was promulgated on 23.10.2015, and the present dispute squarely falls under the definition of 'commercial dispute', in terms of Sec. 2(c) (i), (xii) & (xxi) of the Commercial Courts Act. It has been averred in the appeal that on 5.1.2016, the appellant No.1/plaintiff No.1 had filed an affidavit, detailing the 'specified value' in terms of Sec. 12 of the Commercial Courts Act and determining the 'specified value' of the suit at Rs.4,41,90,000.00, which has been completely overlooked by the Joint Registrar.

(3.) Mr. Chaudhary, learned counsel appearing for the appellants/plaintiffs has submitted that in view of the averments made in the affidavit dated 5.1.2016 filed by the appellant No.1/plaintiff No.1 wherein the specified value of the suit has been determined at Rs.4,41,90,000.00, the same could not be transferred to the trial court and though an objection to the transfer was taken before the learned Joint Registrar, the said plea was not appreciated. Hence the present Chamber Appeal.