The Commercial Courts Act mandates pre-institution mediation only for suits that do not seek urgent interim relief. Courts must assess the necessity for such relief based on the facts presented.

ORDER :

S.SOUNTHAR, J.

The Civil Revision Petition is filed challenging the order passed by the Principal Commercial Court, Egmore, Chennai in C.O.S.(S.R.).No.63 of 2026, dated 03.02.2026 returning the plaint presented by the petitioner with direction to comply with Pre-Institution Mediation and Settlement procedure contemplated under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015.

2. The petitioner herein filed a suit in C.O.S.(S.R.).No.63 of 2026 seeking a declaration that commercial arrangement between the petitioner/plaintiff and the respondent/defendant stood terminated on 31.05.2025 and the usage of printers by the plaintiff belonging to the defendant, until 31.05.2025, was on a unit-rate basis. The petitioner also sought for a declaration that alleged agreements dated 31.10.2023, 08.11.2023, 27.02.2024, 18.06.2024 and 06.12.2024 are illegal, void, unenforceable and not binding on the plaintiff as those agreements were executed without authority or approval of the plaintiff's Board of Directors and the same stands terminated with effect from 31.05.2025. The plaintiff also sought for permanent injunction restraining the defendant from raising or demanding any invoices from 31.05.2025. It also sought for mandatory injunction directing the defendant to take back and remove all the printers and equipments (127 units) from the plaintiff's premises mentioned in the schedule to the plaint. Apart from the above relief, the plaintiff also sought for damages towards unauthorised occupation, storage and demurrage charges at the rate of Rs.3,600/- per month per printer for 127 printers, amounting to Rs.27,43,200/- for a period from June-2025 to November-2025 and for a further sum of Rs.3,600/- per month from December-2025 till the date on which the printers are removed from the plaintiff's premises.

3. The plaint was presented before the Commercial Court and along with the plaint, the plaintiff also filed two interlocutory applications seeking urgent interim relief, which reads as follows:-

(a) Interim Injunction restraining the defendant from raising or issuing any invoices, rentals, click charges, reminders or payment demands against the Plaintiff with effect from 01.06.2025, pending disposal of the suit.

(b) Interim Mandatory Injunction directing the defendant to take back and remove all printers and related equipments (127 units) belonging to the Defendant from the Plaintiff’s premises as mentioned in the Schedule, pending disposal of the suit.

4. The Commercial Court not being satisfied with the pleadings of the plaintiff came to the conclusion that the plaint does not contemplate any urgent interim relief and therefore, the plaintiff has to undergo Pre-Institution Mediation and Settlement procedure as contemplated under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. Since the plaint was presented without undergoing Pre-Institution Mediation and Settlement, on that ground, the plaint was returned with direction to comply with mandatory procedure under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner has come before this Court.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the defendant supplied printers to the petitioners under an agreement, which was not properly authorised by Board of Directors of the petitioner- company and therefore, the agreement, which is the basis for s