CCA-Commercial Courts Act Case Laws (High Court &Supreme Court)

Whether a counter-claimant who did not participate in pre-institution mediation under Section 12A of Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and the mediation process was declared as non-starter, can lodge counter-claim in a commercial suit? | Whether Section 12A is also applicable to any counter-claim? – Adity A Birla Fashion and Retail Ltd. Vs. Mrs Saroj Tandon – Delhi High Court

In this important judgment, Hon’ble Delhi High Court held that

(i) The Commercial Courts Act 2015 and Civil Procedure Code (CPC) do not contain any provision providing for different treatment for any counter-claim.
(ii) The opposite party in counter-claim, thus, gets an ‘indefeasible legal right to participate in mediation’ prior to the institution of counter-claim.
(iii) Merely because, such option was availed/ attempted to be availed in the initial stage and proved to be unsuccessful or returned non-starter, would not suggest and signify that any counter-claimant can straightaway file a commercial suit, not contemplating any urgent relief.
(iv) Process of pre-institution mediation is mandatory for every suit involving a commercial suit and no distinction can be drawn when it comes to a counter-claim involving a commercial dispute and not contemplating any urgent relief. As per the mandate of Patil Automation Pvt. Ltd. (2022) ibclaw.in 101 SC, any such suit, which has been filed without taking recourse of Section 12-A of Commercial Courts Act, needs to be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC.

Whether a counter-claimant who did not participate in pre-institution mediation under Section 12A of Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and the mediation process was declared as non-starter, can lodge counter-claim in a commercial suit? | Whether Section 12A is also applicable to any counter-claim? – Adity A Birla Fashion and Retail Ltd. Vs. Mrs Saroj Tandon – Delhi High Court Read Post »

Applicability of section 36(2) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to Execution Proceeding initiated under section 36(1) and power of Executing as well as Appellate Court to stay the Execution Proceeding during pendency of an Appeal preferred under Section 37 – Birla Institute of Management & Technology (BIMTECH), Gothapatna, Bhubaneswar Vs. Fiberfill Interiors & Constructions, U.P. – Orissa High Court

Login with GoogleOR Username Password Remember Me     Forgot Password In case you’ve already logged in, click here to

Applicability of section 36(2) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to Execution Proceeding initiated under section 36(1) and power of Executing as well as Appellate Court to stay the Execution Proceeding during pendency of an Appeal preferred under Section 37 – Birla Institute of Management & Technology (BIMTECH), Gothapatna, Bhubaneswar Vs. Fiberfill Interiors & Constructions, U.P. – Orissa High Court Read Post »

Scroll to Top