Mediation Act 2023 (HC_SC)-Case Laws

Can the benefit of the condonable period, which expired during the Court’s vacation, be granted when the petition is filed immediately after the reopening of the Court, in exercise of the power under Section 4 of the Limitation Act, 1963? – My Preferred Transformation & Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. Vs. Faridabad Implements Pvt. Ltd. – Supreme Court

The Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that in light of the current position of law, the Section 34 application preferred by the appellant is barred by limitation based on the following conclusions:
(i) There is no wholesale exclusion of Sections 4 to 24 of the Limitation Act when calculating the limitation period under Section 34(3) of the ACA.
(ii) Section 4 of the Limitation Act applies to Section 34(3) of the ACA only to the extent when the 3-month period expires on a court holiday. It does not aid the applicant when the 30-day condonable period expires on a court holiday.
(iii) In view of the applicability of Section 4 of the Limitation Act to Section 34 proceedings, Section 10 of the GCA does not apply and will not benefit the applicant when the 30- day condonable period expires on a court holiday.

Can the benefit of the condonable period, which expired during the Court’s vacation, be granted when the petition is filed immediately after the reopening of the Court, in exercise of the power under Section 4 of the Limitation Act, 1963? – My Preferred Transformation & Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. Vs. Faridabad Implements Pvt. Ltd. – Supreme Court Read Post »

The window of genuine urgency cannot be used to override Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 – Ekta Housing Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Shraddha Shelters Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. – Bombay High Court

Section 80 of the CPC has been enacted as a measure of public policy with the object of ensuring that before a suit is instituted against the Government or a public officer, the Government or the officer concerned is afforded an opportunity to scrutinize the claim in respect of which the Suit is proposed to be filed and if it is found to be a just claim, to take immediate action and thereby avoid unnecessary litigation and save public time and money by settling the claim without driving the person who issued notice, to institute the Suit involving considerable expenditure and delay, similarly, the mandatory provision of Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 of pre-institution mediation is to afford an opportunity to settle the claim to avoid unnecessary litigation involving expenditure and delay and that the window for genuine urgency cannot be used as a mechanism to override Section 12A of the said Act.

The window of genuine urgency cannot be used to override Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 – Ekta Housing Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Shraddha Shelters Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. – Bombay High Court Read Post »

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 »

Even though offence under Section 138 NI Act is quasi criminal in nature, the outcome of settlement in mediation is required to receive imprimatur or authoritative approval of the Court, in case the proceedings are settled in mediation as per the Mediation Act, 2023 – Smt. Nisha Devi Vs. Shri Gur Kirpal Singh @ Guddu – Delhi High Court

Hon’ble Delhi High Court referring the Section 26 of the Mediation Act, 2023 held that even though offence under Section 138 N.I. Act is quasi criminal in nature, the ‘outcome of settlement’ in mediation is required to receive imprimatur or authoritative approval of the Court, in case the proceedings are settled in mediation.

However, it is important to underscore that wheresoever, compromise/ settlement/compounding itself is recorded by the Court, it is inherent that Court is satisfied that the settlement is lawful and has been voluntarily entered between the parties.

There is no bar that unless the matter is forwarded to mediation for settlement, the same cannot be entered before the Court itself. The Court only needs to be satisfied that the settlement is lawful and consent of the parties is voluntary and not obtained under coercion or undue influence.

Even though offence under Section 138 NI Act is quasi criminal in nature, the outcome of settlement in mediation is required to receive imprimatur or authoritative approval of the Court, in case the proceedings are settled in mediation as per the Mediation Act, 2023 – Smt. Nisha Devi Vs. Shri Gur Kirpal Singh @ Guddu – Delhi High Court Read Post »

A Judgment Debtor can file an application for rescission of a contract or for opposing the execution of a decree, on the ground of default of payment of balance consideration within a stipulated period of time – MF Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Anjali – Delhi High Court

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

A Judgment Debtor can file an application for rescission of a contract or for opposing the execution of a decree, on the ground of default of payment of balance consideration within a stipulated period of time – MF Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Anjali – Delhi High Court Read Post »

Scroll to Top