Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 20266
HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Hon`ble Mr.Justice D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY
N.Mohan – Appellant
Versus
G.Balamurugan – Respondent
Pre-litigation mediation under Section 12-A of the Commercial Courts Act is mandatory, and its noncompliance may lead to plaint rejection unless categorized urgent relief demonstrates a genuine requirement.
Headnote:
Mediation - Commercial Litigation - Commercial Courts Act 2015 - Section 12-A - The court upheld the mandatory requirement for pre-litigation mediation under Section 12-A of the Commercial Courts Act, emphasizing its substantive nature and necessity for valid suit initiation. Failure to comply necessitates plaint rejection.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner's interlocutory application for rejection of plaint was dismissed by the trial court, asserting that the suit was initially filed as a normal suit before being categorized as a commercial suit, and that it included a request for urgent relief.
Finding of the Court:
The court recognized the Supreme Court's rulings establishing that pre-litigation mediation is mandatory for commercial suits. An examination of facts indicated that the plaint was filed with claims for urgent relief, which did not automatically invalidate it due to non-compliance with mediation requirements.
Issues: Whether the trial court should have rejected the plaint for lack of pre-litigation mediation in a commercial suit and if the urgent relief request could bypass this requirement.
Ratio Decidendi: The court clarified that Section 12-A requires compliance before filing commercial suits. However, it held that if urgent relief is genuinely sought, dismissal of the plaint is not warranted merely for failure to mediate.
Final Decision: The civil revision petition was dismissed.
ORDER
The Civil Revision Petition is filed against the fair and decretal order dated 15.06.2024 made in I.A.No.03 of 2023 in C.O.S.No.01 of 2022 on the file of the learned Sub Court, Kovilpatti.
2.By the said order, the interlocutory application filed by the petitioner was dismissed. By the said interlocutory application, the petitioner has prayed for rejection of plaint under Order VII, Rule 11 of CPC. The contention of the petitioner was that when the suit is taken on file as a commercial suit, the petitioner had not resorted to the mandatory pre-litigation mediation under Section 12-A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and as such, the trial Court has no other go than to reject the plaint for not resorting to pre-litigation mediation.
3.The trial Court considered the case of the parties and considered the fact that firstly, the suit was initially filed as a normal suit and thereafter, transferred to the file of the Commercial Court and the Commercial Court proceeded with the trial and the entire trial itself is now complete and further, considered that the suit was also filed along with an urgent relief of attachment before judgment and on those grounds rejected the application filed by the petitioner.
4.The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner would submit that when the suit is ultimately taken on file as the commercial suit, pre-litigation mediation is held to be mandatory and the suit is filed without resorting to the pre-litigation mediation, the trial Court ought to have rejected the plaint.
5.I have considered the said submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material records of the case.
6.The matter is no longer res integra. The question relating to pre-litigation mediation has since been considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Patil Automation Private Limited and Ors. Vs. Rakheja Engineers Private Limited 1. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India summarized the arguments against the mandatory mediation in paragraph No.9 and in paragraph No.48 held that Section 12-A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 is not a mere procedural law, but a substantive provision. In paragraph No.49, it is held that the very object will be defeated by non- compliance of the mandatory mediation. It has further held that the right to sue itself will accrue and fructify only on compliance of Section 12-A of the . In paragraph Nos.70 and 71 of the said Judgment, the Hon'ble Supreme Court also dealt with the purpose of pre- litigation mediation being the matter of public policy that commercial
1 2022 SCC Online SC 1028 litigations should be resolved at the earliest and in paragraph No.77, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India held that the decision to mediate does not block access to justice. The Court held that unless a party resorts to pre- litigation mediation, the plaint has to be rejected. The plaint has to be rejected even if the parties have not filed an application to that effect. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India held that pre-litigation mediation by itself is access to justice and based on public policy that commercial litigations shall be resolved in quick time thus furthering the cause of the ease of doing business.
7.Thus, as per Patil Automation1, the requirement to attempt pre-litigation mediation Section 12-A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 is mandatory. If the parties filed the suit without any application for urgent relief and without resorting to the pre-litigation mediation, then the Court has no other option than to reject the plaint.
8.With reference to cases where the commercial suit is filed with an application for interim relief and without resorting to pre-litigation mediation, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India had considered the same in the case of Yamini Manohar Vs. TKD Keerthi , [Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No(s).32275 of 2023]. When contradictory views arose with reference to whether or not the Court can decide whether urgent interim relief is neede
