Mandatory pre-institution mediation under commercial courts law required rejection of the plaint where no urgent interim relief was sought.

Section 12-A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 is mandatory for commercial suits where no urgent interim relief is sought, and the urgent relief exception does not apply in such a case. A claimed prior attempt at mediation was insufficient because no mediation report showed failure of mediation; materials only indicated discussions of compromise before another court, which was distinguishable from mediation under the authorised mechanism. Because the suit was instituted without compliance with the pre-institution mediation requirement, rejection of the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 CPC followed. Exemption from pre-institution mediation was therefore declined.

---

---

Issues: Whether exemption from pre-institution mediation under Section 12-A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 was justified, and whether non-compliance with that mandate required rejection of the plaint.

Analysis: Section 12-A is mandatory for commercial suits not seeking urgent interim relief. The exception for urgent interim relief did not apply because no such relief was sought. The asserted prior attempt at mediation was not supported by any mediation report showing failure of mediation, and the materials filed only showed that compromise was discussed before another court. That was held to be distinguishable from a case where mediation had in fact taken place under the authorised mediation mechanism. In view of the mandatory nature of the pre-institution mediation requirement, institution of the suit without compliance attracted rejection of the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Conclusion: Exemption from pre-institution mediation was declined, and the plaint was rejected for want of compliance with Section 12-A.

---