Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
Patil Automation Private Limited vs Rakheja Engineers Private Limited. SC remarks on mediators
|
Patil automation private limited (Petitioners) V. Rakheja engineers private ltd. (Respondents)
Mr Ayush Negi, Advocate – for Petitioners Mr Saket Sikri, Advocate- for respondents CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 14697 of 2021) with CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022(Arising out of SLP (C) No.5737 of 2022) ALONG WITH SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION DAIRY NO. 29458 OF 2021 The fact of this case is briefly discussed that the suit was filed for recovery of Rs. 1,00,40,291/- by M/s Rakheja engineers private ltd, Faridabad against defendant M/s Patil automation private limited under XXXVII CPC in the commercial court, commercial division, Faridabad Under Order VII Rules 10 and 11 read with sections 9 and 20, An application was filed by the defendant. After taking various legal objections, a written statement came to be filled on 23.03.2021. On 16.08.2021, the contention of the appellant was rejected by the trial court inter alia holding as follows: “20. From the bare perusal of Section 12a, it is crystal clear that the procedure provided is mandatory and if by applying the said principles, the suit of the plaintiff is rejected, then it would have a catastrophe effect. The court is of the view that the legislature has no intention to frame such stringent provisions in the said rules. The aim and object of Section 12A are to ensure that before a commercial dispute is filed before the court, alternative means of dissolution are adopted so that the genuine cases come before the Court. Further, it also appears to the court that the said procedure has been introduced to de-congest the regular courts. It is pertinent that the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Ganga Tara Vazirani (supra), held that the procedure provided under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act is not a penal enactment for punishment. The fact is clear that before filing the suit, the respondent/plaintiff sent an e-mail and legal notice and despite that, the applicant/defendant failed to make the payment of the dues.
Moreover, it is well settled that 3 the procedure and law are for the advancement of justice and not to thwart on technical grounds. Thus, in the larger interest of justice, the court deems it appropriate that the civil suit can be kept in abeyance and both the parties are directed to appear before the Secretary, District Legal Services Authority, Faridabad on 26.08.2021 for mediation as per the provisions of Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act and the Rules framed thereunder. With these directions, the application is disposed of.” In the other appeal arising out of SLP (c) No. 5737 of 2022, the high court of Madras had passed the impugned order, rejecting a similar application filed by the appellant defendant in a commercial suit instituted without having resorted to pre-litigation mediation under section 13A of the act. There was another special leave petition was filed by SLP Dairy No. 29458 of 2021. An application was filed for permission to file a special leave petition. In this special leave petition, the order impugned is the same one which is impugned SLP (C)NO. 5737 OF 2022.
Tags : #M/s patil automation pvt ltd #rakheja engineers pvt ltd #mr. Ayush negi # mr. Saket sikri #cpc #thecommercial court #high court #SLP # trial court
Allow Cookies!By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
Copyright Kalyan Krishna MediaZ Private Limited. All rights reserved. Unless otherwise indicated, all materials on these pages are copyrighted by Kalyan Krishna MediaZ Private Limited. All rights reserved. No part of these pages, either text or image may be used for any purpose. By continuing past this page, you agree to our Terms of Service, Cookie Policy, Privacy Policy and Content Policies.