The court affirmed that procedural non-compliance in mediation does not affect the merits of ongoing legal proceedings.

ORAL ORDER

Petitioner is before this Court seeking the following prayers:

"a) Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, quashing the order dated 10.09.2025, passed by the LXXXV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Commercial Court, (CCH-86) Bengaluru, on the memo dated 09.09.2025 filed by the Petitioner- Defendant, in Com. O.S. No. 1165/2024, produced at Annexure-A, and consequently direct the office of District Legal Services Authority, Bengaluru Urban to produce records before the Trial Court in PIM. No. 403/2024 for appropriate orders.

b) Grant such other relief or reliefs, as this Hon'ble court may deem fit to grant in the circumstances of the case."

2. Heard Sri.Abhinav Ramanand, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri.Freud Richardson, appearing for respondent No.1 and have perused the material on record.

3. The petitioner is the tenant-the defendant, the respondents-plaintiffs are the land owners. The two are before the Commercial Court in a Com.O.S.No.1165/2024 instituted by the respondents-plaintiffs. The issue is not with regard to the merit of the matter. The suit is instituted on 31.08.2024 and the suit has progressed. During the progression of the suit, it transpires that the petitioner-the defendant files a memo seeking production of documents. The documents that the petitioner wants to be placed before the concerned Court for evidence is the records obtaining in pre-institution mediation proceedings in PIM No.403/2024. The concerned Court rejects the application on the score that suit has progressed to a large extent and it is open to the petitioner to avail of such remedy as is available in law before the appropriate Fora. It is therefore the petitioner is at the doors of this Court.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would reiterate the contentions advanced in the application before the concerned Court.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent-

caveator would submit that the suit is at an advanced stage where evidence also is completed and the arguments are on. At that point in time, a memo for production of documents concerning the PIM is preferred. He would further submit that it is an admitted fact that at least two or three rounds of mediation did take place during the pendency of the proceedings in the Commercial OS. Therefore, there is no warrant of getting the records of a PIM which has happened anterior to the institution of the suit itself. He would submit that there is no deposition at the time of evidence with regard to no notice being served at the time of the pre-institution mediation, be that as it may. The concerned Court by the following order has rejected the Memo.

"ORDERS ON MEMO At the stage of arguments of the defendant and reply the defendant has filed this memo seeking for summoning of the records in PIM No.403/2024 from the office of DLSA Bengaluru Urban to ascertain whether there is issuance of final notice as contemplated under Rule3(3) of Commercial Courts Pre-Institution Mediation and Settlement rules 2018.(PIM Rules)

2. The counsel for defendant would submit that as per the said PIM rules notice of mediation must be issued under Rule3(2) and where there is no response received from the opposite party there shall be a final notice issued under Rule3(3). The counsel for defendant would submit that no final notice has been issued and therefore records to be summoned for ascertaining the same from the concerned authority. In reply learned counsel for the plaintiff would orally submit that prior to institution of the suit notice of PIM proceedings was sent by way of email to the defendant at the email address which has been duly delivered and