Karnataka High Court
M/S Coldex Logistics Private Ltd vs Mr Narasimha Murthy V on 11 November, 2020
Author: Krishna S.Dixit
Bench: Krishna S.Dixit
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2020
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT
WRIT PETITION NO.9489 OF 2020 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
M/S COLDEX LOGISTICS PRIVATE LTD.
A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE
PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956
HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT
404, 4TH FLOOR, VISHAL TOWER,
DISTRICT CENTRE, JANAK PURI,
NEW DELHI - 110 058.
REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSISTANT MANAGER
AND AUTHORISED SIGNATORY
MR. DHANRAJ JENA.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. NIDHISHREE B.V, ADVOCATE)
AND:
MR. NARASIMHA MURTHY V,
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
S/O MR. VENKATARAMAIAH,
RESIDING AT BOMMASHETTIHALLI,
DOOR # 10, HUSKAR POST,
DASANPURA HOBLI,
BENGALURU NORTH TALUKA,
BENGALURU.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. SHAMANTH S.N., ADVOCATE)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
ORDER DATED 29.07.2020 (ANNEXURE-A) PASSED BY THE
COURT OF THE LXXXIII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS
JUDGE, (COMMERCIAL COURT) AT BENGALURU (CCH-84) IN
COM.O.S.NO.195/2020 ON I.A.NO.1 AND 2 FILED BY THE
PETITIONER AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING IN 'B' GROUP THIS DAY THROUGH VIDEO
CONFERENCE, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
2
ORDER
Petitioner being the plaintiff in an injunctive suit in COM.O.S.No.195/2020, is knocking at the doors of writ court for assailing the order dated 29.07.2020, a copy where of is at Annexure-A, whereby the LXXXIII Additional City Civil Judge, (Commercial Court), Bengaluru (CCH-84) has returned the plaint as being not maintainable on the ground of non-compliance of the requirement of pre-institution mediation in terms of Section 12A(1) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015.
2. After service of notice, the respondent having entered appearance through his learned counsel, vehemently resists the writ petition in making submission in justification of the impugned order and the reasoning on which it is structured.
3. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the petition papers, this Court is inclined to grant indulgence in the matter 3 inasmuch as pre-institution mediation contemplated u/s 12A(1) of the Act, is not a Thumb Rule as the language of the said provision itself shows that in matters involving urgency, the statutory rigor does not come in the way of institution of a suit sans mediation; sub-section (1) of Section 12A of the Act reads as under:
"12A. (1) A suit, which does not contemplate any urgent interim relief under this Act, shall not be instituted unless the plaintiff exhausts the remedy of pre-institution mediation in accordance with such manner and procedure as may be prescribed by rules made by the Central Government."
In the above circumstances, this writ petition is allowed in part; impugned order is set at naught; the matter is remanded for consideration of the suit without reference to Section 12A(1) of the Act; the Court below is requested to take up petitioners' applications for the grant of interim protection and dispose off the same within an outer limit of two weeks; all contentions of the parties are kept open.
4
The interim protection granted by this court shall continue till the consideration of its subject applications takes place at the hands of the court below which shall not be influenced by this interim protection in any way whatsoever, the same having been made in peculiar circumstances of the case.
The parties are put to notice through their counsel to appear before the trial Judge on 17.11.2020 and seek further instructions at his hands.
No costs.
Sd/-
JUDGE DS