Showing posts with label pre-litigation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label pre-litigation. Show all posts

Friday, 26 August 2022

Should the court reject the plaint if the plaintiff fails to comply Pre-litigation mediation as mandated U/S 12A of The Commercial courts' Act?

 We declare that Section 12A of the Act is mandatory and hold that any suit instituted violating the mandate of Section 12A must be visited with rejection of the plaint under Order VII Rule 11. This power can be exercised even suo moto by the court as explained earlier in the judgment. We, however, make this declaration effective from 20.08.2022 so that concerned stakeholders become sufficiently informed. Still further, we however direct that in case plaints have been already rejected and no steps have been taken within the period of limitation, the matter cannot be reopened on the basis of this declaration. Still further, if the order of rejection of the plaint has been acted upon by filing a fresh suit, the declaration of prospective effect will not avail the plaintiff. Finally, if the plaint is filed violating Section 12A after the jurisdictional High Court has declared Section 12A mandatory also, the plaintiff will not be entitled to the relief. {Para 92}

 In the Supreme Court of India

(Before K.M. Joseph and Hrishikesh Roy, JJ.)

Civil Appeal No. of 2022

Patil Automation Private Limited and Others Vs

Rakheja Engineers Private Limited 

Decided on August 17, 2022

Citation: 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1028

Print Page

Saturday, 14 November 2020

Questions and answers on law Part 14

Q.1:-Whether a special court under Pocso Act can grant Anticipatory bail to an accused charged with section 8 of pocso act?

Ans:-Section 8 of POCSO Act Whoever commits sexual assault shall be punished with the imprisonment of either description for a term which shall not less than three years but which may extend to five years, and shall also be liable to fine.

In my opinion, as this offence is punishable with imprisonment for more than three years, it is non bailable and application for anticipatory bail is maintainable. Caselaw on the point is 

With Section 8 Of The Pocso Act vs In Re: Azad Paswan @ Ajad Pasoyan & ... on 15 January, 2020 

Any other view is welcomed

Print Page

Wednesday, 9 September 2020

Supreme Court guidelines for the online trial of cheque dishonour case

 Banks, being an important stakeholders in cases of this nature, it is their responsibility to provide requisite details and facilitate an expeditious trial mandated by law. An information sharing mechanism may be developed where the banks share all the requisite details available of the accused, who is the account holder, with the complainant and the police for the purpose of execution of process. This may include a requirement to print relevant information, viz the email id, registered mobile number and permanent address of the account holder, on the cheque or dishonour memo informing the holder about the dishonour. The Reserve Bank of India, being the regulatory body may also evolve guidelines for banks to facilitate requisite information for the trial of these cases and such other matters as may be required. A separate software-based mechanism may be developed to track and ensure the service of process on the accused in cases relating to an offence Under Section 138 of N.I. Act.

12. With ensuring the credibility of cheques, it is equally important that cheques are not allowed to be misused giving cause to frivolous litigation. The Reserve Bank of India may consider developing a new proforma of cheques so as to include the purpose of payment, along with other informations mentioned above to facilitate adjudication of real issues.

13. Further, a mechanism may be developed to ensure the presence of the accused even by way of coercive measure, if required, taking effect from Section 83 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 which allows attachment of property, including movable property. A similar coordinated effort may be evolved to recover interim compensation Under Section 143A of the N.I. Act as well as fine or compensation to be recovered as per Section 421 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 The Bank may facilitate mechanism for transferring requisite funds from the bank account of the accused to the account of the holder in due course, as may be directed by the Court.

14. With ever growing institution of N.I. cases, there is a need of developing a mechanism for pre-litigation settlement in these cases. The Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 provides for a statutory mechanism for disposal of case by Lok Adalat at pre-litigation stage Under Sections 19 and 20 of the Act. Further, Section 21 of the Act, recognises an award passed by Lok Adalats as a decree of a civil court and gives it a finality. This Court in K.N. Govindan Kutty Menon v. C.D. Shaji MANU/SC/1412/2011 : 2012 (1) R.C.R. (Criminal) 102 : (2012) 2 SCC 51 has held that:

Even if a matter is referred by a criminal court Under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and by virtue of the deeming provisions, the award passed by the Lok Adalat based on a compromise has to be treated as a decree capable of execution by a civil court.
15. The effect of above legal proposition is that an Award passed at the pre-litigation stage or pre-cognizance stage shall have an effect of a civil decree. The National Legal Services Authority, being the responsible Authority in this regard, may evolve a scheme for settlement of dispute relating to cheque bounce at pre-litigation i.e. before filing of the private complaint. This measure of pre-litigation ADR process can go a long way in settling the cases before they come to Court, thereby reducing docket burden.

16. The High Courts, in addition to the above, may also consider setting up of exclusive courts to deal with matters relating to Section 138, especially in establishments where the pendency is above a standard figure. Special norms for assessment of the work of exclusive courts may also be formulated giving additional weightage to disposal of case within the time-frame as per legal requirement.

17. This Court in the case of Meters and Instruments Private Limited (supra), observed the following:

Use of modern technology needs to be considered not only for paperless courts but also to reduce overcrowding of courts. There appears to be need to consider categories of cases which can be partly or entirely concluded "online" without physical presence of the parties by simplifying procedures where seriously disputed questions are not required to be adjudicated. Traffic challans may perhaps be one such category. At least some number of Section 138 cases can be decided online. If complaint with affidavits and documents can be filed online, process issued online and accused pays the specified amount online, it may obviate the need for personal appearance of the complainant or the accused. Only if the accused contests, need for appearance of parties may arise which may be through Counsel and wherever viable, video conferencing can be used. Personal appearances can be dispensed with on suitable self operating conditions. This is a matter to be considered by the High Courts and wherever viable, appropriate directions can be issued.

(emphasis supplied)

In view of the above, the status of directions issued or measures adopted by the High Courts may be assessed and a best suited mechanism in this direction may be considered.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 5464 of 2016

Decided On: 05.03.2020

 Makwana Mangaldas Tulsidas Vs.  State of Gujarat and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
S.A. Bobde, CJI and L. Nageswara Rao, JJ.

Citation: (2020) 4 SCC 695,MANU/SC/0517/2020
Print Page

Wednesday, 18 October 2017

Whether permanent lok adalat can grant interim relief in pre-litigation proceeding?

 I have considered the submissions of the parties and gone through the material on record. As per the chronology of facts narrated hereinabove, it is evident that on the date on which the proceedings were instituted as a pre-litigation case under Section 22 of Legal Services Authority Act, i.e., on 31st August, 2015, Bank had proceeded in taking symbolic possession of the property under Section 13(4) of the Act, 2002. An application for taking physical possession of the property through use of force was also pending before Deputy Commissioner Bokaro under Section 14 of the Act of 2002. In that way, any court or authority was precluded from passing any order of injunction in respect of action taken by the Bank/Financial institution in pursuance of the power conferred under the SARFAESI Act, 2002. The P.L.A however proceeded to not only entertain the application as a pre-litigation application but also passed an interim order upon the Bank to maintain status quo and not to take further action against the petitioner. This action of the P.L.A was wholly without jurisdiction. It was in teeth of the provisions of Section 34 of the Act, 2002. Proceeding in P.L.A are to be held in a spirit of conciliation and settlement. Any decision in pre-litigation case on merits under Section 22-C(8) can be passed after following the procedure prescribed under Section 22-C. The procedure has been well interpreted and laid down by learned Single Judge of this Court in the case of Branch Manager, Tata AIG v. Mrs. Bandana Devi reported in MANU/JH/0255/2010 : (2010) 3 JLJR 312 relied upon by the petitioner Bank.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

W.P. (C) No. 6328 of 2015

Decided On: 04.05.2016

Allahabad Bank Vs. Sunita Devi

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
Aparesh Kumar Singh, J.
Citation:AIR 2017 JHAR 118
Print Page