Interlocutory appeals are where commercial litigation goes to die — which is why the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 closed the door on most of them. Section 13(1A) gives an appeal from a judgment or order of a Commercial Court or Commercial Division to the Commercial Appellate Division within sixty days; but its proviso confines appeals from orders to those specifically enumerated in Order XLIII of the CPC as amended by the Act, and Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Section 13(2) then bars any appeal "otherwise than in accordance with the provisions of this Act", and Section 8 bars civil revision applications against interlocutory orders, channelling every grievance into the eventual appeal from the decree. The architecture rewards parties who know exactly which orders can be fought now and which must wait.
The map of appellate routes
| Order below | Appealable now? | Route |
|---|---|---|
| Final judgment/decree of Commercial Court | Yes | Section 13 appeal to Commercial Appellate Division, 60 days |
| Temporary injunction granted/refused (O.XXXIX R.1, 2, 4) | Yes | Enumerated in Order XLIII — Section 13 appeal |
| Ex parte decree set aside / refusal (O.IX R.13) | Yes | Enumerated — Section 13 appeal |
| Section 9, 34 and other orders under the Arbitration Act | Per Section 37 | Section 13 read with Section 37 — only the listed categories |
| Amendment, discovery, late documents, framing of issues, summary judgment refusals | No | Raise in the decree appeal; Article 227 only for jurisdictional error |
| Any interlocutory order, by revision | No | Barred by Section 8 |
Three recurring battlegrounds
Strategic consequences
The closed list changes how commercial trials are fought. First, interlocutory skirmishes lose much of their delay value: an adverse procedural order cannot detour the suit into an appellate queue, so resources are better spent on the trial record — which is also where the eventual decree appeal will be won. Second, objections must be preserved: a party aggrieved by an unappealable order should record its objection on the file, because the decree appeal is the forum where it resurfaces. Third, the sixty-day limitation under Section 13 is construed strictly in commercial matters, in keeping with the Act\'s timeline discipline — appeals should be prepared against the pronouncement date, not the certified-copy habit of ordinary civil practice. Finally, for arbitration users, the forum question (Commercial Court, Commercial Division, or the High Court\'s arbitration jurisdiction) determines the appellate court, and should be verified before filing rather than after losing.
- Before filing any appeal: locate the order in the Order XLIII or Section 37 list by provision, not by instinct.
- Before filing an Article 227 petition: articulate the jurisdictional error in one sentence; if it cannot be done, the petition is a substitute appeal and will be treated as one.
- Before ignoring an adverse interlocutory order: note the objection and its prejudice on record for the decree appeal.
Practice note: The Delhi High Court\'s Commercial Appellate Divisions apply these gates with increasing strictness, and recent decisions have reiterated both the narrowness of Article 227 and its availability for genuinely jurisdictional errors. The discipline cuts both ways: fewer appeals to defend, but no second chances for objections never recorded.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which orders of a Commercial Court are appealable?
Broadly: judgments and decrees; the Order XLIII CPC orders as applied by the Act — such as orders under Order IX Rule 13 (setting aside or refusing to set aside ex parte decrees), Order XXXIX Rules 1, 2 and 4 (temporary injunctions), appointment of receivers and the other enumerated heads; and arbitration-related orders appealable under Section 37 of the 1996 Act.
Can an order rejecting an amendment or allowing late documents be appealed?
No — such case-management and procedural orders are not in the enumerated list. The remedy is to challenge them, if at all, in the appeal from the final judgment, or in a rare case through Article 227 where the order involves a jurisdictional error going to the root.
Is revision under Section 115 CPC available against Commercial Court orders?
No. Section 8 of the Act bars civil revision applications and petitions against interlocutory orders of Commercial Courts; the grievance must be raised in the appeal against the decree.
Does Article 227 survive the bar?
Yes — supervisory jurisdiction is constitutional and cannot be excluded by statute, but the High Courts exercise it sparingly in commercial matters, confined to jurisdictional errors, and not as a substitute appeal. Recent Delhi practice shows interference where a Commercial Court applied the wrong statutory test, and refusal almost everywhere else.