BOARD OF MUMBAI PORT Vs. DSV GERIMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Interim Application seeks to amend the Plaint as per the schedule.

(2.) When the matter is called out, at the outset, Mr. Gandhi, learned Counsel appearing for the Defendants/Respondents, submits that while he has no objection to the amendments seeking to add Exhibits H-1 to H-10 as the said amendments are with respect to events subsequent to the filing of the Suit, however, with respect to Exhibits H-11 to H-14, he has instructions to oppose the Interim Application in as much as the said documents were even prior to the filing of the Suit in the Plaintiff/ Applicant power, possession, control and custody, but were not filed with the Plaint and in view of the provisions of Order XI Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ("CPC") as amended by the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and as applicable to the Commercial Courts cannot be permitted.

(3.) Upon a query from the Court to Mr. Gandhi as to whether he has instructions to oppose the other consequential amendments except Exhibits H-11 to H-14, Mr. Gandhi answers in the negative.