Authority: High Court at Calcutta
Order Date: 17 July 2026
Case Overview
- Parties: Appellants – Pradeep Kumar Jain and Sons (HUF), Shruti Jain, Kusum Jain, Raagini Sarees Private Ltd, Deep Kumar Jain, and Pradeep Kumar Jain; Respondent – Sri Sri Iswar Mahadev and others.
- Six parallel appeals (APOT/195‑200/2024) challenged dismissal of applications under Order VII Rule 11 CPC seeking rejection of eviction suits filed in 2016.
- Plaintiffs sought eviction of tenants; defendants argued the suits are commercial disputes under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, and that non‑compliance with Section 12A (mandatory after 11 December 2020) should not invalidate suits filed in 2016.
- The court examined precedents: AIR 2021 Cal 190 (Laxmi Polyfab Pvt Ltd. v. Eden Realty Ventures), Patil Automation Pvt Ltd. v. Rakheja Engineers (2022 10 SCC 1), and SLP (C) No. 8111 2026 (Balaji Industrial Engineering v. SAIL‑IISCO).
- It held that suits filed before 11 December 2020 are not vitiated by non‑compliance with Section 12A and that the disputes are indeed commercial.
Final Outcome
- All six appeals and the connected applications (CS/189‑194/2016) are dismissed without any order as to costs.
- The records are directed to be transmitted from the Non‑Commercial Division to the Commercial Division under Section 15 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, where they will be renumbered and disposed of.
- No costs awarded; appellants indicated willingness to pay any occupation charges if the court subsequently directs.
Topics: Commercial Courts, Eviction Litigation