Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 31 views

    Rakheja Engineers Private LTD, Decided On 17.08.2022, As The

    Uploaded by

    Raveena Kataria
    This order decides a defendant's application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC in a commercial suit. The defendant argued that the suit should be rejected as the plaintiff did not exhaust the pre-institution mediation remedy required by the Commercial Courts Act. However, the court noted that the suit was originally filed as an ordinary civil suit and transferred to the commercial court later. As the suit was not instituted as a commercial suit initially, the pre-institution mediation provisions do not apply. Therefore, the court dismissed the defendant's application.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Rakheja Engineers Private LTD, Decided On 17.08.2022, As The

    Uploaded by

    Raveena Kataria
    31 views3 pages
    This order decides a defendant's application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC in a commercial suit. The defendant argued that the suit should be rejected as the plaintiff did not exhaust the pre-institution mediation remedy required by the Commercial Courts Act. However, the court noted that the suit was originally filed as an ordinary civil suit and transferred to the commercial court later. As the suit was not instituted as a commercial suit initially, the pre-institution mediation provisions do not apply. Therefore, the court dismissed the defendant's application.

    Original Title

    Untitled

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This order decides a defendant's application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC in a commercial suit. The defendant argued that the suit should be rejected as the plaintiff did not exhaust the pre-institution mediation remedy required by the Commercial Courts Act. However, the court noted that the suit was originally filed as an ordinary civil suit and transferred to the commercial court later. As the suit was not instituted as a commercial suit initially, the pre-institution mediation provisions do not apply. Therefore, the court dismissed the defendant's application.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    31 views3 pages

    Rakheja Engineers Private LTD, Decided On 17.08.2022, As The

    Uploaded by

    Raveena Kataria
    This order decides a defendant's application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC in a commercial suit. The defendant argued that the suit should be rejected as the plaintiff did not exhaust the pre-institution mediation remedy required by the Commercial Courts Act. However, the court noted that the suit was originally filed as an ordinary civil suit and transferred to the commercial court later. As the suit was not instituted as a commercial suit initially, the pre-institution mediation provisions do not apply. Therefore, the court dismissed the defendant's application.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    You are on page 1of 3

    THE 

    COURT OF DISTRICT JUDGE 
    (COMMERCIAL COURT­01), 
    SOUTH­EAST, SAKET COURTS, NEW DELHI

    Presiding Officer: Sh. UMED SINGH GREWAL

    CS (Comm) No 592/19

    Brand Protectors India Pvt. Ltd.    .....Plaintiff

    Vs.

    Kent RO Systems Ltd              .........Defendant
    ORDER 
    1.   This order shall decide an application of the defendant
    under Order VII Rule 11 CPC.

    2. Background of the application is ordinary suit for


    recovery of Rs. 3,87,874/-.

    3. Learned counsel for defendant argued that as per Section


    12 A of Commercial Courts Act, 2015, no suit can be instituted
    without exhausting the remedy of pre institution mediation, unless
    any urgent interim relief has been claimed. He further submitted that
    in the case in hand, no application for urgent relief was filed by the
    plaintiff and hence, the plaint be rejected u/o VII Rule 11 CPC in
    view of “ M/s Patil Automation Private Limited And Ors. Vs.
    Rakheja Engineers Private Ltd, decided on 17.08.2022, as the

    Case No 529/19 Brand Protectors India Pvt Ltd Vs. Kent RO Systems Ltd Page 1 of 3


    provisions of Section 12 A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 have
    been declared mandatory in nature.
    On the other hand, learned counsel for plaintiff argued
    that the suit was filed as an ordinary suit in ordinary civil court where
    it remained pending for three years. It has been transferred to this
    Commercial Court by that ordinary civil court on 30.08.2022. The
    counsel next argued that as the case was not filed as commercial suit,
    provisions of Section 12 A of the Act are not applicable.

    4. The suit was filed in the ordinary civil court on


    16.07.2019 and it was transferred to this court on 30.08.2022. In the
    meantime, the defendant had filed written statement belatedly and the
    same was allowed to be taken on record vide order dated 30.11.2021,
    even though the observation of the court was that the defendant had
    failed to explain the delay sufficiently. So, till the stage of taking on
    record the written statement, the defendant took benefit of the
    procedure described under Civil Procedure Code, 1908. After taking
    on record its written statement, the defendant became aggressive and
    in order to take benefit of the stringent provisions of the Commercial
    Courts Act, 2015, it moved an application u/o VII Rule 11 CPC.

    It is the admitted fact that the suit was instituted as an


    ordinary civil suit before the ordinary civil court. It remained pending
    for three years in that court. Section 12 A of the Act comes into play
    when a suit is instituted as a commercial suit before a commercial
    court. Due to that reason, the application u/o VII Rule 11 CPC is

    Case No 529/19 Brand Protectors India Pvt Ltd Vs. Kent RO Systems Ltd Page 2 of 3


    dismissed.
    Announced in Open Court
    on 13.09 .2022 (UMED SINGH GREWAL)
       District Judge (Commercial Court) 
    South East/Saket Courts, New Delhi 

    Case No 529/19 Brand Protectors India Pvt Ltd Vs. Kent RO Systems Ltd Page 3 of 3

    You might also like