The concept of Summary trial was first brought forward in The Law Commission report where it recommended in its 253rd Report the introduction of a new summary judgment procedure that would allow the courts to resolve any commercial dispute claim without recording oral testimony, provided the application for summary judgment was submitted prior to the framing of issues1, where required, conditional orders may also be issued by courts. Summary judgment is referred to as a crude tool that has the power to suddenly end legal proceedings. While a summary judgment does not replace a formal trial, it is a mechanism that courts can use to eliminate situations that can be settled without one.
Statutory Provisions
Order XIII A allows the applicability of summary judgment only on matters relating to commercial dispute.2 This was added by the Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Act, 2015, (hereinafter referred as “the Act”) in the Civil Procedure Code. According to these provisions, courts can, upon request from a party i.e., the plaintiff or the defendant, decide a claim pertaining to commercial disputes without taking oral testimony, which may include a part of a claim, a counterclaim, or a specific question on which the whole or part of the claim depends. This is meant to circumvent the drawn-out trial process.
Regarding the application of summary trial to any suit of a commercial dispute of a specified value, the Act states that the court may decide a claim pertaining to any commercial dispute without recording oral evidence if the court is of the opinion that the plaintiff has no real prospect of succeeding in the claim or defendant has no real prospect of defending the claim as the case maybe and certain provisions of the CPC stand amended in the manner specified in the Schedule to the Act, and the same shall be followed by the Commercial Division and Commercial Court in the trial of a suit in respect of a commercial dispute of a specified value.3
A party may submit an application for a summary judgement in the manner specified any time after the summons has been served on the defendant and before the issues have been framed, within 30 days, the respondent has the option to react in the way specified. The court has the authority to issue any order it sees suitable regarding this. Making an order that it thinks appropriate, such as dismissing an application and issuing a conditional order or rendering a judgment on the claim (that may, for instance, provide security for restitution of costs).4 Before a summary judgment can be granted, two requirements must be met, there must stand an actual issue of material facts and the parties have a right to such judgment.5
Judicial Precedents
The concept has been accepted and appreciated by the courts via various judgments, the SC in matter titled as Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprises v. K. S. Infraspace LLP6 held that the statutory provisions of the Act and the words incorporated thereon are to be meaningfully interpreted for quick disposal of commercial litigations in order to benefit the litigants, especially those who are engaged in trade and commerce, which in turn will further economic growth of the country.
Delhi High Court in the matter titled as Bright Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. v. M. J. Bizcraft LLP7 has held that “From the provisions laid out in Order XIIIA, it is evident that the proceedings before Court are adversarial in nature and not inquisitorial. It follows, therefore, that summary judgment under Order XIIIA cannot be rendered in the absence of an adversary and merely upon the inquisition by the Court. The Court is never an adversary in a dispute between parties.”
Further, in 2019 the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the matter titled as Su-Kam Power Systems Ltd. v. Kunwer Sachdev8 has held that where the court determines that the defendant has no realistic chance of successfully defending the claim and that there are no other compelling reasons why the claim should not be resolved before the taking of oral testimony, the court may grant a summary judgment against the defendant under Order XIII-A CPC Rule 3. The word “real” instructs the court to consider whether the chances of success are realistic rather than improbable.
The Delhi High Court in the matter of Impresario Entertainment & Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Mocha Blu Coffee Shop,9 was faced with the question of whether the plaintiff was entitled to a decree since the matter was filed under Order VIII Rule 10 read with Order XIII-A of the Act, 2015. The court came to the conclusion that these provisions empower the court to provide a summary judgment in cases where it appears that the defendant has little chance of successfully defending against the claim. The question arose because the court can only conveniently pass a judgment and decree against the defendant who has not filed the written statement when it is completely satisfied, for reasons that can be found in the record, that there is no fact that needs to be proven at the plaintiff’s instance in light of the deemed admission by the defendant. It would not be safe for the court to record an ex-parte judgment without ordering the plaintiff to prove the facts in order to resolve the factual controversy, however, if the plaint itself indicates that there are disputed questions of fact involved in the case arising from the plaint itself giving rise to two versions, it would not be safe for the court to record an ex parte judgment without directing the plaintiff to prove the fact so as to settle the factual controversy.<sup>10</sup>
Conclusion
Relying on the legislative intention along with the judicial opinion on such provisions, it can be stated that not only Commercial Courts can proceed with summary judgment but also that it is a wanted mechanism within the field of commercial dispute. The courts only need to ensure that the following requirements are being met that for a claim to be dismissed or decreed before oral testimony is recorded:
(a) the plaintiff has no genuine chance of winning the case, or
(b) the defendant has no real chance of defeating the claim.
One of the main tenets of the Rules of Civil Procedure is to provide the fairest, fastest, and least expensive resolution of each civil matter on the merits. This is supported by judgment and the methods to resolve an issue before a trial. A party has legal options at its disposal to do this if a trial can be avoided, sped up, or the scope of the legal concerns can be reduced.
The only goal of the method outlined in Order XIII-A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 is to shorten the time required to resolve a commercial dispute involving a certain amount of money.11 It is common knowledge that the main goal of the Code change is to increase the confidence of the business community in the impartiality, openness, and efficiency of the justice delivery system. The current provision also addresses gaps that some parties were able to exploit.
However, it would have been reasonable to suppose that plaintiffs would have enthusiastically sought summary judgment of their claims given the backlog of cases in India and the time constraints and pressures specific to commercial lawsuits. This hasn’t happened, though. Only a few published judgments, some five years after the Act went into effect, show that in very few cases summary judgment was requested.
1Law Commission Report, No. 253 (2015).2Civil Procedure Code, No. 5 of 1908, Order XIII-A.
3The Commercial Courts Act, No. 4 of 2015, §16.
4Achal Gupta, Summary Judgement, SCC ONLINE, Accessed at
https://www.scconline.com/blog/post/2020/07/29/summary-judgment/
5Achal Gupta, Summary Judgement, SCC ONLINE, Accessed at
https://www.scconline.com/blog/post/2020/07/29/summary-judgment/
6Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprises v. K. S. Infraspace Llp 2019 SCC OnLine SC 1311.
7Bright Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. v. M. J. Bizcraft LLP, 2016 SCC OnLine Delhi 4421.
8Su-Kam Power Systems Ltd. v. Kunwer Sachdev, 2019 SCC OnLine Del 10764.
9I.A. 21714/2015.
10I.A. 21714/2015.
11Civil Procedure Code, No. 5 of 1908, Order XIII-A.