IN THE HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Ravi Krishan Kapur, J.
Gavrill Metal Pvt. Ltd. - Appellant
Versus
Maira Fabricators Pvt. Ltd. - Respondent
GA 2 of 2022 In CS No. 130 of 2020
Decided On : 04-07-2022
Dispensation - Pre-Institution Mediation and Settlement - Commercial Courts Act, 2015, Section 12A
Fact of the Case:
The defendant filed an application for revocation of the dispensation granted to the plaintiff for Pre-Institution Mediation and Settlement under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, and for dismissal of the suit. The plaintiff had not taken any steps for mediation and had not filed any application for urgent reliefs, despite seeking dispensation with compliance of Section 12A.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the requirement for Pre-Institution Mediation and Settlement under Section 12A of the Act is mandatory, and the dispensation granted to the plaintiff was based on false grounds. As a result, the dispensation was revoked, and the suit was dismissed.
Issues: The main issue was whether the plaintiff's request for dispensation with compliance of Section 12A of the Act was valid, considering the lack of steps taken for mediation and the absence of any application for urgent reliefs.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the provisions of Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 are mandatory, and a suit relating to a commercial dispute must undergo Pre-Institution Mediation and Settlement unless urgent reliefs are sought. The court also emphasized that the dispensation can only be granted in cases where urgent reliefs are sought, which was not the situation in this suit.
Final Decision: The dispensation granted to the plaintiff under Section 12A of the Act was revoked, and the suit was dismissed.
JUDGMENT
Ravi Krishan Kapur, J. - This is an application for revocation of the dispensation granted to the plaintiff for Pre-Institution Mediation and Settlement under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 (the Act) and for dismissal of the suit.
2. The application has been filed by the defendant on the grounds that even though the plaint in this suit was presented as far back as 3 November, 2020, the plaintiff has not filed any application for any interlocutory relief far less any urgent reliefs. Hence, the dispensation with compliance of Section 12 A of the Act had been wrongly granted and is liable to be revoked.
3. The suit was filed on 3 November, 2020. In this suit, the plaintiff has filed an application being GA No. 1 of 2020 sometime in March 2022, seeking amendments to the plaint. No other steps whatsoever have been taken by the plaintiff. It is alleged that the defendant has not even been served the Writ of Summons. It is also alleged that the plaint has also not been verified in terms Rule 15 A of Order 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. In this background, the defendant seeks dismissal of the suit.
4. On behalf of the plaintiff, it is submitted that dispensation with the requirement of Pre-Institution Mediation and Settlement was sought for on the grounds that no prescribed procedure for conducting mediations was operational nor had any Rules for the same been framed. Thus, there was no question of the plaintiff taking any steps for mediation.
5. Section 12 A of the Act provides as follows:-
'12 A Pre-Institution Mediation and Settlement. - (1) A suit, which does not contemplate any urgent interim relief under this act, shall not be instituted unless the plaintiff exhausts the remedy of pre-institution mediation in accordance with such manner and procedure as may be prescribed by rules made by the Central Government.
(2) The Central Government may, by notification, authorize the Authorities constituted under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 (39 of 1987), for the purposes of preinstitution mediation.
(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Legal Services authorities Act, 1987 (39 of 1987), the authority authorised by Central Government under sub-section (2) shall complete the process of mediation within a period of three months from the date of application made by the plaintiff under sub-section (1):
Provided that the period of mediation may be extended for a further period of two months with the consent of the parties:
Provided further that, the period during which the parties remained occupied with the pre-institution mediation, such period shall not be computed for the purpose of limitation under the Limitation Act, 1963 (36 of 1963).
(4) If the parties to the commercial dispute arrive at a settlement, the same shall be reduced into writing and shall be signed by the parties to the dispute and the mediator.
(5) The settlement arrived at under this section shall have the same status and effect as if it is an arbitral award on agreed terms under sub-section (4) of Section 30 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (26 of 1996).'
6. In Laxmi Polyfab Pvt. Ltd. and Others vs. Eden Realty Ventures Pvt. Ltd. and Others (AIR 2021 Cal 190), a Single Judge of this Court has held the provisions of Section 12 A of the Act to be mandatory, subject to the exception as contemplated under the section in respect of suits where the plaintiff seeks urgent interim reliefs.
7. The scheme of Section 12 A is that a commercial dispute under the Act must receive Pre-Institution Mediation and Settlement. Such Pre- Institution Mediation and Settlement has to be completed within a stipulated time period. The provisions for Pre-Institution Mediation and Settlement are a mechanism for expeditious redressal of commercial disputes. In fact, Section 12A of the Act debars the plaintiff from instituting a suit relating to a commercial dispute without exhausting the remedy of Pre-Institution Mediation and Settlement unless the p
AI
The judgment establishes the mandatory nature of Pre-Institution Mediation and Settlement under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, and clarifies the limited circumstances under which dis....
Maintainability of commercial suit – Suit which does not contemplate any urgent interim reliefs cannot be instituted unless plaintiff exhausts mandatory remedy provided under Section 12A of Commercia....
Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act requires pre-institution mediation for suits not seeking urgent relief, establishing a mandatory procedural framework.
The court affirmed the mandatory nature of pre-suit mediation under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, ruling for rejection of plaint lacking demonstration of urgency.
The court upheld the rejection of the plaint for failing to comply with mandatory pre-suit mediation under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015.
The court ruled that substantial compliance with pre-litigation mediation is sufficient under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, allowing a case to proceed without re-initiating mediatio....
The court emphasized the importance of pre-institution mediation in commercial disputes, the need for proper infrastructure and trained mediators, and the court's discretion to adjust equities for th....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.