Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Scanned Judgements…!
Checking relevance for Jaycee Housing Pvt. Ltd. VS Registrar (General), Orissa High Court, Cuttack...
Jaycee Housing Pvt. Ltd. VS Registrar (General), Orissa High Court, Cuttack - 2022 8 Supreme 464 : The judgment clarifies that under Section 10 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, all applications or appeals arising out of arbitration under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (other than international commercial arbitration) shall be filed in, heard, and disposed of by Commercial Courts exercising territorial jurisdiction over such arbitration, where such Commercial Courts have been constituted. This provision overrides conflicting provisions in the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, including Section 2(1)(e), due to the overriding effect conferred by Section 21 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. The court held that the State Government''''s notification conferring jurisdiction on Civil Judge (Senior Division) as a Commercial Court to hear such arbitration applications is valid and in consonance with the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. The judgment emphasizes that there cannot be two fora for different commercial disputes, and the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 was enacted with the object of ensuring speedy disposal of commercial disputes, including arbitration matters.Checking relevance for Dhanbad Fuels Private Limited VS Union Of India...
Dhanbad Fuels Private Limited VS Union Of India - 2025 0 Supreme(SC) 835 : The Commercial Courts Act, 2015, introduced mandatory pre-institution mediation under Section 12A, which became effective prospectively from 20.08.2022. Suits filed before this date are not to be dismissed for non-compliance with the mediation requirement; instead, they are to be kept in abeyance for mediation. The court emphasized that the mandatory nature of Section 12A was not applied retroactively due to the lack of infrastructure and trained mediators at the time of filing, invoking the principle of lex non cogit ad impossibilia. The High Court''''s order to refer such suits to mediation was upheld as justified.Checking relevance for Patil Automation Private Limited VS Rakheja Engineers Private Limited...
Patil Automation Private Limited VS Rakheja Engineers Private Limited - 2022 7 Supreme 607 : The Commercial Courts Act, 2015, as amended by the Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts (Amendment) Act, 2018, mandates pre-litigation mediation under Section 12A for commercial suits where no urgent interim relief is contemplated. This provision is mandatory, and any suit instituted in violation of Section 12A must be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908. The court may exercise this power suo motu. The declaration that Section 12A is mandatory is effective from 20.08.2022, and it applies prospectively to suits filed after that date. Plaints filed after this date that violate Section 12A cannot be maintained and will be rejected. The purpose of this provision is to reduce the burden on courts and promote early resolution of commercial disputes, aligning with India''''s efforts to improve its ranking in the World Bank ''''Doing Business Report''''.Checking relevance for Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprises Ltd. VS K. S. Infraspace LLP...
Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprises Ltd. VS K. S. Infraspace LLP - 2019 8 Supreme 588 : The judgment clarifies that for a dispute to fall under the jurisdiction of a Commercial Court under Section 2(1)(c)(vii) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, the immovable property must be ''''used exclusively'''' or ''''being used exclusively'''' in trade or commerce at the time of the agreement or suit. The term ''''used'''' means ''''actually used'''' and does not include property that is merely ''''ready for use'''', ''''likely to be used'''', or ''''to be used''''. The court held that a suit for execution of a mortgage deed, without any reference to the property being used in trade or commerce, was not maintainable before a Commercial Court. The High Court was correct in directing the plaint to be returned to the appropriate court. The judgment emphasizes strict interpretation of the commercial nature of property to ensure the Act''''s objective of speedy disposal of commercial disputes is not undermined.Checking relevance for Kandla Export Corporation VS OCI Corporation...
Kandla Export Corporation VS OCI Corporation - 2018 6 Supreme 4 : The judgment clarifies that appeals not maintainable under Section 50 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, are not maintainable under Section 13(1) of the Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Act, 2015. Specifically, the court held that Section 13(1) of the 2015 Act does not apply to cases covered by Section 50 of the Arbitration Act, as Section 50 forms part of an exhaustive, self-contained code with negative import. The court further emphasized that if an appeal lies under Section 50, then only Section 13(1) would be attracted to determine the forum for hearing such appeal. The judgment also confirms that the Commercial Courts Act does not provide additional rights of appeal beyond those already available under the Arbitration Act, particularly in matters involving enforcement of foreign awards. This interpretation ensures harmonious construction between the two statutes, with the special law (Arbitration Act) prevailing over the general law (Commercial Courts Act) to achieve the objective of speedy resolution of commercial disputes.
