Dismissed¶24

M/S Raman Construction Pvt. Ltd. v. M/S Drishti Trade and Exports

Calcutta HC17 Dec 2024CS-COM/422/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Maintainability of suit and application; judgment upon admission; pre-litigation mediation in commercial disputes; PLM/29/2021; mediation settlement order dated 23.12.2021 accepted by both parties; remedy by execution of mediation order; Calcutta High Court Commercial Division Original Side; GA-COM/2/2023 in CS-COM/422/2024 (Old No. CS/217/2022); M/s. Raman Construction Pvt. Ltd. vs M/s. Drishti Trade and Exports; Krishna Rao J.; dismissed as not maintainable; decree sought for Rs.3,16,76,280 with interest.

What did the court decide?

The Court found that the matter has been settled between the parties in the pre-litigation mediation by the Mediator's order dated 23rd December 2021, which was duly accepted by both parties. ¶19

M/S Raman Construction Pvt. Ltd. Vs M/S Drishti Trade and Exports — Calcutta HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

OCD-13

¶2

ORDER SHEET

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA COMMERCIAL DIVISION ORIGINAL SIDE

¶4

IA No. GA-COM/2/2023 In CS-COM/422/2024

¶5

M/S. RAMAN CONSTRUCTION PVT LTD -VSM/S. DRISHTI TRADE AND EXPORTS

¶6

BEFORE:

¶7

The Hon'ble JUSTICE KRISHNA RAO Date : December 17, 2024.

¶8

Appearance: Mr. Anirban Ray, Sr. Adv. Mr. Debraj Sahu, Adv. Ms. Sweta Mukherjee, Adv. … for the plaintiff

¶9

Mr. Siddhartha Banerjee, Adv. Mr. Subir Banerjee, Adv. Mr. Sital Chakraborty, Adv. Ms. Susmita Nath, Adv. … for the defendant

¶10

The Court: Mr. Anirban Ray, learned Senior Advocate, is appearing for the plaintiff.

¶11

Mr. Siddhartha Banerjee, learned Advocate, is appearing for the defendant.

¶12

The plaintiff has filed the present suit being CS-COM/422/2024 (Old No. CS/217/2022) praying for a decree for a sum of Rs.3,16,76,280/along with interest.

¶13

The plaintiff has also filed an application being GA-COM/2/2023 praying for judgment upon admission on the ground that the defendant has admitted the claim of the plaintiff in the mediation proceeding which was

¶14

¶15

disposed of with the settlement between the parties by an order dated 23^rd December, 2021. The plaintiff has filed the present application being GACOM/2/2023 on the basis of the settlement arrived between the parties before the Mediator.

¶16

Counsel for the defendant has raised objection and submitted that neither the suit nor the application filed by the plaintiff is maintainable and prayed for dismissal of the suit as well as the application. Counsel for the defendant submits that the order passed by the learned Mediator as settlement cannot be relied by the plaintiff in the present suit.

¶17

Counsel for the plaintiff submits that in spite of the settlement arrived between the parties and the fact that the defendant has admitted the amount claimed by the plaintiff, the defendant has not paid the said amount in terms of the settlement. Accordingly, the plaintiff has no other alternative but to file the present suit for recovery of the said amount.

¶18

Heard learned counsel for the respective parties. Perused the plaint and the settlement arrived between the parties before the Mediator in the pre-litigation mediation in commercial disputes in connection with PLM/29/2021 (M/s. Raman Construction Pvt. Ltd. vs. M/s. Drishti Trade & Exports).

¶19

This Court finds that before the learned Mediator the parties have settled their disputes and accordingly, the learned Mediator has passed the order which was duly accepted by both the parties on 23^rd December, 2021. Thus, this Court finds that the matter has been settled between the parties in the pre-litigation mediation by an order dated 23^rd December, 2021 and as such, if the defendant fails to carry out the order or comply with the settlement, the plaintiff is having other remedy to execute the said order.

¶20

¶21

Thus, the suit being CS-COM/422/2024 (Old No. CS/217/2022) along with

¶22

the application being GA-COM/2/2023 is not maintainable.

¶23

Accordingly, CS-COM/422/2024 (Old No. CS/217/2022) along

¶24

with GA-COM/2/2023 is dismissed as not maintainable.

¶25

It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the merits of the

¶26