Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

3. Learned Senior Counsel was requested to address this Commercial Division regarding requirements qua Section 12A of 'The Commercial Courts Act, 2015 (Act 4 of 2016)', (hereinafter 'CCA' for the sake of convenience and clarity) in the light of Patil Automation case law (2022 SCC OnLine SC 1028) as date of institution of captioned suit is 14.09.2022 (post 20.08.2022), the submissions in response to this request were two-fold. One facet of the submission is that Section 12A of CCA is inapplicable to the captioned main suit as according to the learned Senior Counsel, institution of suit is prior to 20.08.2022. Another facet of the submission (obviously on a demurrer) is that the suit on hand [captioned suit] is one where 'urgent interim relief' is contemplated and therefore, it will not be hit by Patil Automation principle i.e, ratio laid down/law declared by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Patil Automation Private Limited & Others V. Rakheja Engineers Private Limited reported in 2022 SCC OnLine SC 4\52 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.S.(Comm.Div.) No. 202 of 2022 1028.

6. As regards the first facet of submission that the date of institution of the suit is prior to 20.08.2022, the order dated 10.10.2022 (Sri Padman Biosciences Private Limited V. M/s. Bookmed Technologies Private Ltd [C.S.(Comm.Div.) 198 of 2022] is clearly distinguishable on facts. That was a case where the plaint was lying with the Registry post LTS order. There was one working day, ie, 18.08.2022 but the suit was ultimately numbered only on 02.09.2022 whereas in the case on hand, though LTS was granted on 17.08.2022, plaint was presented only on 30.08.2022 (admittedly, with court- fee which means that on 12.08.2022, the intended plaint was not presented with court-fee). This is being explained by saying that the plaintiff's counsel was waiting for a certified copy of LTS order and the order copy was received only on 29.08.2022. Even if this argument is accepted, still it does not cut ice for the reason that the judgment in Patil Automation case was rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court on 17.08.2022 where the cut-off date of 20.08.2022 had clearly been prescribed vide paragraph No.92. There is no explanation from the plaintiff as to what made the plaintiff to present the 12\52 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.S.(Comm.Div.) No. 202 of 2022 plaint on 30.08.2022 on the teeth of Patil Automation case dated 17.08.2022 and paragraph No.92 thereat which made it clear that suits instituted post 20.08.2022 without adhering to Section 12A of CCA would be hit by the rigor of Section 12A. To be noted, in Patil Automation case, Hon'ble Supreme Court had made it clear that 20.08.2022 is being fixed as effective date from which the declaration would kick in for the purpose of ensuring that concerned stakeholders become sufficiently informed. The relevant portion at paragraph No.92 reads as follows:

10. As regards suo motu rejection, in paragrah Nos. 75 & 76 of Patil Automation case, Hon'ble Supreme Court has made it clear that rejection powers under Order VII Rule 11 CPC can be exercised by a Commercial Division without waiting for an application. Paragraph Nos. 75 & 76 of Patil Automation case read as follows:

'75. Order VII Rule 11 declares that the plaint can be rejected on 6 grounds. They include failure to disclose the cause of action, and where the suit appears from the statement in the plaint to be barred. We are concerned in these cases with the latter. Order VII Rule 12 provides that when a plaint is rejected, an order to that effect with reasons must be recorded. Order VII Rule 13 provides that rejection of the plaint mentioned in Order VII Rule 11 does not by itself preclude the plaintiff from presenting a fresh plaint in respect of the same cause of action. Order VII deals with various aspects about what is to be pleaded in a plaint, the documents that should accompany and other details. Order IV Rule 1 provides that a suit is instituted by presentation of the plaint to the court or such officer as the court appoints. By virtue of Order IV Rule 1(3), a plaint is to be deemed as duly instituted only when it 22\52 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.S.(Comm.Div.) No. 202 of 2022 complies with the requirements under Order VI and Order VII. Order V Rule 1 declares that when a suit has been duly instituted, a summon may be issued to the defendant to answer the claim on a date specified therein. There are other details in the Order with which we are not to be detained. We have referred to these rules to prepare the stage for considering the question as to whether the power under Order VII Rule 11 is to be exercised only on an application by the defendant and the stage at which it can be exercised. In Patasibai v.Ratanlal, one of the specific contentions was that there was no specific objection for rejecting of the plaint taken earlier. In the facts of the case, the Court observed as under:
13. In Patil Automation, more particularly paragraph 76 (extracted and reproduced elsewhere in this order / judgment), Hon'ble Supreme Court has made it clear that rejection of plaint can be done suo motu by the court concerned. Therefore, whether the suit (under Order VII Rule 11(d) of CPC) is barred by law (Section 12A of CCA) is the question which this Commercial Division can examine suo motu. To be noted, on and from 20.08.2022, in the light of Patil Automation pronouncement, Section 12A of CCA is mandatory. This means that the ultimate prerogative to examine 'contemplation of urgent interim relief' within the meaning of sub section (1) of section 12A of CCA vests in this Commercial Division. It is to be borne in 37\52 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.S.(Comm.Div.) No. 202 of 2022 mind that the expression as in section 12A(1) of CCA is not mere 'interim relief' but it is 'urgent' interim relief. In this scenario, if one were to borrow the language of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Patil Automation, section 12A of CCA is a toddler. Therefore, this Commercial Division considers it necessary to elucidate qua expression 'contemplation of urgent interim relief'. If one were to examine, explain and elucidate this expression, it is imperative to first examine the meaning of four terms and they are: (a)contemplate, (b)urgent,