SURAJLAL Vs. PRADEEP STAINLESS INDIA PVT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Finding itself unable to agree with the pronouncement of the Division Bench in Hindustan Unilever Limited Ponds House v. S.Shanthi, reported in 2021 (6) CTC 1, another Division Bench of this Court had referred the following questions for determination by the Full Bench:

(2.) The facts which are necessary for disposal of this reference are as follows: The first respondent in all these Appeals instituted a suit against the appellants, four in number, seeking a money decree for Rs.12,39,749.55 US Dollars at the exchange rate on the date of the judgment payable towards the 17 unpaid Bills, to pay interest of Rs.18,46,665.39 calculated at 12% per annum on the said bills and to pay interest at 12% per annum on 12,39,749.55 US Dollars from the date of plaint till date of realisation.

(3.) Contending contra Mr.K.Sukumaran, learned counsel appearing for the first respondent in all the Appeals would submit that the stage at which the order is passed does not really matter. It is the subject matter of the suit that has to be looked into. If it is found that the subject matter of the suit could be termed as a commercial dispute within any one of the Sub Clauses (i) to (xxi) of Sub Sec. (c) of Sec. 2 of the Commercial Courts Act, then the same would qualify as a commercial dispute which is to be dealt with by the Commercial Division.