Karnataka HC Notices Sri Lankan Judge's Rights Plea
07 Mar 2026
Karnataka Proposes Social Media Ban for Under-16s
07 Mar 2026
Justice Dharmadhikari Sworn In as 55th Madras HC Chief Justice
07 Mar 2026
Punjab HC Acquits Ram Rahim in Journalist Murder
07 Mar 2026
Appellate Courts Can Rely on Unexhibited Public Documents Produced by Plaintiff: Gujarat High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Under Section 100 CPC
07 Mar 2026
Punjab & Haryana HC Denies Anticipatory Bail in Murder via Humiliation Case: Sections 103(1) & 3(5) BNS
07 Mar 2026
Security Deposit Forfeiture Without Show-Cause Notice Violates Natural Justice: Himachal Pradesh High Court
07 Mar 2026
S.202 CrPC Inquiry Not Mandatory for Public Servant Complaints If Accused Outside Jurisdiction: Supreme Court
09 Mar 2026
Professor MP Singh: Shaper of Constitutional Discourse
09 Mar 2026
Back
Next 
REKHA PALLI, SAURABH BANERJEE
CHIBBA AGRO PVT. LTD. – Appellant
Versus
NARENDER KUMAR GUPTA – Respondent
Headnote: Read headnote
JUDGMENT :
SAURABH BANERJEE, J.
1. The present appeal under Section 96 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) seeks to assail the judgment and decree dated 31.08.2024 passed by the learned District Judge, Commercial Courts, Tis Hazari Courts, New Delhi in CS(COMM) 260/2019 and CS(COMM) 04/2020, the latter being the counter claim raised by the appellant.
2. Vide the impugned judgment, the suit preferred by the respondent/plaintiff (respondent) has been decreed for a sum of Rs.4,22,620/- alongwith pendente lite interest and future interest @ 8% per annum.
3. The sole submission of learned counsel for the appellant/ defendant (appellant) is that the suit ought to have been rejected at the very outset as the respondent had refused to participate in the pre-litigation mediation envisaged under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).
4. By drawing our attention to the ‘Non-Starter Report’ dated 28.02.2019 issued by the Central District Legal Service Authority, Tis Hazari Courts, D
The invocation of pre-litigation mediation under Section 12A is mandatory, but failure to reach a settlement does not invalidate the compliance with the provision.
Non-compliance with the procedure of Pre-Institution Mediation under Section 12A of the Act does not apply if both parties refuse to participate and a non-starter report is generated.
Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act mandates pre-institution mediation, but if both parties refuse to participate, the suit may proceed without being barred by law.
Mandatory compliance with Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act for Pre-Institution Mediation is required for the maintainability of commercial suits.
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.
Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act requires pre-institution mediation for suits not seeking urgent relief, establishing a mandatory procedural framework.
Mandatory compliance with Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 for suits not contemplating urgent interim relief, and the prevention of deceptive invocation of urgent relief to circumvent t....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
Listen Article