Blog

Well, here’s another twist and turn in the much-debated topic of MANDATORY PRE-INSTITUTION MEDIATION UNDER S.12A OF THE COMMERCIAL COURTS ACT, 2015 (CCA, 2015) FOR THE CASES PERTAINING TO TRADEMARKS.

After judgments delivered IN RE PATIL AUTOMATION and T K D KEERTHI delivered by Hon’ble Supreme court while interpreting s. 12 A of the CCA, 2015, which was further discussed, interpreted and explained by several High courts across the country holding conflicting opinions with regards to dismissal of suit & non – dismissal of suit, Here comes another interesting angle with regards to interpretation of “CONTEMPLATING URGENT INTERIM RELIEF” in Trademark case by Hon’ble Bombay High Court. Here the Hon’ble court has given importance to public interest and continuous cause of action enabling plaintiff to contemplate urgent interim relief even after a delay of 8 years from the date of knowledge and pleadings of the plaintiff in this regard in the plaint.

The Bombay High Court in nut shell has held that Delay committed by the Plaintiff in approaching the court cannot be a ground to negate the contemplation of URGENT INTERIM RELIEF and thereby forcing the plaintiff to undergo mandatory pre-instituion mediation under s. 12A of the CCA, 2015. The larger public interest, confusion and deception and continuity in cause of action are also relevant consideration which can enable a plaintiff to contemplate and seek urgent interim relief even if the plaintiff approaches the court after much delay and the suit cannot be dismissed on the ground of mandatory pre-institution mediation and delay committed by the plaintiff.