Delhi HC Rejects Innovatiview’s Non-Urgent ₹3.58-Crore Suit Against Rajasthan Board For Skipping Mediation, Orders Court-Fee Refund

The plaintiff filed a commercial suit seeking recovery of ₹3,58,80,205, with interest.

Although the suit was accompanied by four applications, none sought urgent interim relief. The plaintiff had not undertaken pre-institution mediation under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, and its counsel acknowledged both points.

The Court held the suit liable to rejection for non-compliance with Section 12A. The plaintiff then sought return of the court fee and liberty to institute a fresh suit after completing mediation.

Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 makes pre-institution mediation mandatory for suits that do not contemplate urgent interim relief; the Supreme Court’s decision in Patil Automation (P) Ltd. v. Rakheja Engineers (P) Ltd., 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1028, was relied on for rejection of a suit instituted in breach of that requirement.

On court-fee refund, the Court considered authorities cited by the plaintiff, including Mr Rakesh Mediratta v. Asian Hotels (North) Limited & Anr., 2026 DHC 7988, which treated rejection for non-compliance with Section 12A as a procedural, non-merits disposition and supported return of court fee in the circumstances.

The suit sought monetary recovery and none of the accompanying applications sought urgent interim relief. Since the plaintiff had not pursued pre-institution mediation, Section 12A applied, and Patil Automation required rejection of the suit.

The Court then accepted the plaintiff’s request for return of the court fee, relying on the cited authorities addressing threshold rejection without adjudication on the merits. It also preserved the plaintiff’s ability to bring a fresh suit after complying with Section 12A, subject to the defendant’s rights and contentions.

It directed that the court fee be returned and permitted the plaintiff to file a fresh suit, if required, after completing pre-institution mediation, without prejudice to the defendant’s rights and contentions.

Pending applications were also disposed of.