Simara Foods vs Vardhaman Mehta — CHOL/29/2026

Case under The Commercial Courts,commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Act,2015 Section 1. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OFF on 17th April 2026.

CNR: HCBM020417572025

CASE DISPOSED

e-Filing Number

19-12-2025

Filing Number

CHOL/41756/2025

Filing Date

19-12-2025

Registration No

CHOL/29/2026

Registration Date

13-01-2026

Judge

Shri. A. H. Laddhad(Prothonotary Senior Master)

Coram

Shri. A. H. Laddhad(Prothonotary Senior Master)

Bench Type

Single

Category

CHAMBER ORDER OS OFFICERS ( 64 )

Sub-Category

Restoration which are rejected under Rule 986 ( 5 )

Judicial Branch

Original

Decision Date

17th April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED OFF

Acts & Sections

The Commercial Courts,commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Act,2015 Section 1

Petitioner(s)

Simara Foods

Adv. Swapan Samdani

Respondent(s)

Vardhaman Mehta

Prakash Agro Commodity

Vardhaman Commercial

Pritesh Maheshwari

Manju Maheshwari

Ritu Sharma

Hearing History

Judge: Shri. A. H. Laddhad(Prothonotary Senior Master)

17-04-2026

FOR HEARING AND FINAL DISPOSAL

Orders

17-04-2026
Shri. A. H. Laddhad(Prothonotary Senior Master)

The court granted Simara Foods' chamber order to restore the suit that was rejected on 16.07.2025 for non-compliance with office objections, condoning a 110-day delay caused by the plaintiff's senior citizen status, a colleague's overseas residence, and communication gaps with counsel. The court found no prejudice to defendants, who can contest the suit on merits, and directed the plaintiff to remove office objections and file compliance within four weeks or face rejection. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The court granted Simara Foods' chamber order to restore the suit that was rejected on 16.07.2025 for non-compliance with office objections, condoning a 110-day delay caused by the plaintiff's senior citizen status, a colleague's overseas residence, and communication gaps with counsel. The court found no prejudice to defendants, who can contest the suit on merits, and directed the plaintiff to remove office objections and file compliance within four weeks or face rejection. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Explore other courts

Search Another Case