The Bombay High Court dismissed an appeal worth 31 million dollars filed by several insurance companies against an airport ground handling firm in a landmark judgment. The insurance cos filed for damages through the appeal after the commercial court ruled in favor of the ground handling firm. The Division Bench of the High Court agreed with the judgment pronounced by the commercial court. It held that it was not a case coming under the heads of commercial dispute, under the provisions of the Act on the Commercial Courts, 2015.The case was an appeal directed by the insurance companies to file a claim against the ground handling firm. In the claim filed against the ground handling firm, it had been alleged that due to negligence, it has caused such financial losses that the insurance companies prayed for damages in the amount of $31 million. The companies had insured those goods and services to be handled by the firm and insisted that the firm handled equipment improperly, which led to losses and therefore constituted their cause of liability to pay out on those insurance claims. This led the companies to recover loss from the ground handling company. But when the case first came to court, the commercial judge dismissed the suit. The said commercial court held that the dispute did not fall within the definition of "commercial dispute" contained in the Commercial Courts Act of 2015. The Act defines what falls within or what constitutes a commercial dispute, normally involving any disagreement concerning trade, commerce, or business contract. The court held that the dispute was more closely linked to an insurance claim and liability matter rather than a direct commercial or contractual dispute between businesses. Unhappy with the decision, the insurance companies appealed before the Bombay High Court, reasoning that the commercial court was wrong in dismissing the case and that the matter was essentially a commercial dispute. They said it involved sufficient money, as well as the nature of the relationship between the parties for it to be treated as a commercial dispute. The Division Bench of the Bombay High Court refused to accept the submissions made by the insurance companies. The High Court agreed with the decision of the commercial court while handling the subject matter and held that the nature of the claim was not purely commercial within the meaning of the Act. It was held that the issue was an insurance claim and reimbursement which falls outside the purview of normal things that would be considered under the 2015 Act as constituting a commercial dispute. With this view, judgment of the court has far-reaching implications in that it sustains narrow view what is considered to fall under the description of a commercial dispute for the purposes of the Commercial Courts Act so that by definition, this act cannot be misapplied to insurance claims and other non-commercial legal matters. A ruling of such importance is that it emphasizes the point that the provisions of courts dedicated to commercial affairs, like commercial courts, can be invoked only after proper understanding and legal deliberation. From the judgment, the insurance companies cannot pursue their $31 million claim further under the Commercial Courts Act; however, they can consider other legal options.