M/S Prestige Estate Projects Ltd vs Svn Prestige Garden
2023 Latest Caselaw 4278 Kant

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 4278 Kant
Judgement Date : 11 July, 2023

Karnataka High Court

M/S Prestige Estate Projects Ltd vs Svn Prestige Garden on 11 July, 2023

Bench: Alok Aradhe, Anant Ramanath Hegde

                                            -1-
                                                  NC: 2023:KHC:23865-DB
                                                     COMAP No. 321 of 2022




                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                          DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF JULY, 2023

                                         PRESENT
                          THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
                                            AND
                     THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
                           COMMERCIAL APPEAL NO.321 OF 2022
                   BETWEEN:
                   M/S. PRESTIGE ESTATE PROJECTS LTD.,
                   A PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER
                   COMPANIES ACT, 1956,
                   HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 19,
                   PRESTIGE FALCON TOWER
                   BRUNTON ROAD
                   BANGALORE-560025
                   REP. BY ITS SENIOR MANAGER-SECRETARIAL
                   MR. LINGRAJ PATRA
                   S/O SIBA PRASAD PATRA
                   AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS
                                                            ...APPELLANT

Digitally signed
                   (BY MISS MEDHINI RAO, ADV. FOR
by BELUR
RANGADHAMA
                       SRI. HARIKRISHNA S HOLLA, ADVOCATE)
NANDINI
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
                   AND:

                   SVN PRESTIGE GARDEN
                   PRESTIGE GARDEN
                   BIKAS NAGAR
                   PIPE LINE ROAD
                   P O SALUGARA-734008
                   P S BHAKTINAGAR
                   DIST. JALPAIGURI
                              -2-
                                   NC: 2023:KHC:23865-DB
                                      COMAP No. 321 of 2022




REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR
SRI VIKASH GOEL
                                              ...RESPONDENT
(RESPONDENT - SERVED)

     THIS COMAP / COMMERCIAL APPEAL IS FILED U/S 13(1A)
OF THE COMMERCIAL COURTS ACT, 2015 R/W ORDER XLIII
RULE 1(4) AND SECTION 104 OF THE CPC, PRAYING TO SET
ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 05/07/2022 PASSED BY THE LXXXII
ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE COMMERCIAL COURT
(CCH-83) BENGALURU IN COM.O.S.NO.943/2022 AND ETC.

    THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:


                        JUDGMENT

Ms.Medhini Rao, learned counsel for Mr.Harikrishna

S.Holla, learned counsel for the appellant.

None for the respondent though served.

This appeal under Section 13(1A) of the Commercial

Courts Act, 2015, has been filed against the order dated

05.07.2022 passed in Com.O.S.No.943/2022 by the

LXXXII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru

(for short, 'the Commercial Court') by which the

commercial Court has directed return of the plaint on the

NC: 2023:KHC:23865-DB COMAP No. 321 of 2022

ground that the appellant has failed to comply with Section

12A of the Commercial Courts Act.

2. The facts giving rise to filing of the appeal

briefly stated are that the appellant, which is the company

incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act,

1956, filed a suit for permanent injunction restraining the

respondent from infringing the plaintiff's registered

trademark in respect of the Prestige and Prestige Group

and Prestige Estates. Along with the suit, the plaintiff filed

an application seeking ad-interim order of injunction under

Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of CPC.

3. The Commercial Court, however, by an order

dated 05.07.2022 returned the plaint on the ground that

the plaintiff has failed to comply with the mandate

contained in Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act,

2015.

4. We have heard the learned counsel for the

appellant at length.

NC: 2023:KHC:23865-DB COMAP No. 321 of 2022

5. Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, is

extracted below for facility of reference:

12A. Pre-Institution Mediation and Settlement--(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 preinstitution mediation in accordance with such manner and procedure as may be prescribed by rules made by the Central Government.

6. Thus, it is evident that the provisions of Section

12A of the Commercial Courts Act apply to a suit which

does not contemplate any urgent interim relief. In the

instant case, the appellant, along with the plaint, has filed

an application seeking ad-interim relief which in the matter

of infringement of trademark can be said to be an urgent

interim relief.

7. The Commercial Court, therefore, grossly erred

in applying the provision of Section 12A of the Commercial

Courts Act to the facts of the case.

NC: 2023:KHC:23865-DB COMAP No. 321 of 2022

8. For the aforementioned reasons, the impugned