CS(COMM) 1206/2025 Page 1 of 4 $~53 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(COMM) 1206/2025, I.A. 28035/2025, I.A. 28036/2025, I.A. 9449/2026, O.A. 101/2026 GURPREET SINGH SHAH .....Plaintiff Through: Mr. Charanpreet Singh and Mr. Akshat Chawla, Adv. versus AIRSERCO PVT LTD & ORS. .....Defendants Through: Ms. Madhumita Bhattacharjee, Mr. Keshav Bansal, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD O R D E R % 24.07.2026 1. The instant Commercial Suit is for specific performance of an Agreement to Sell dated 13.05.2024, by which the Defendants have agreed to sell the industrial property bearing No. 10/1, Block B, Okhla Industrial Area Phase-II, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Suit Property’), to the Plaintiff herein for a total sale consideration of Rs. 15,20,00,000/-. 2. Along with the Plaint, the Plaintiff had also filed an Application, being I.A. 28035/2025, for waiver of pre-institution mediation proceedings, which is mandatory under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. When the matter came up for hearing on 13.11.2025, this Court, without having any discussion on I.A. 28035/2025, issued summons to the Defendants and also passed ex-parte ad-interim injunction in favour of the Plaintiffs and against the Defendants from creating any third-party interest This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/07/2026 at 14:45:39 CS(COMM) 1206/2025 Page 2 of 4 in the Suit Property. 3. On 21.07.2026, an Application, being I.A. 9449/2026, which was filed by the Defendants under Order VII Rule 11 CPC for rejection of the Plaint on the ground that it is barred under Order VII Rule 11(d) of CPC, was listed before a co-ordinate Bench of this Court. During the course of the arguments in the said Application, learned Counsel for the Plaintiff contended that the Application for waiver of pre-institution mediation was allowed by this Court vide order dated 13.11.2025 and, therefore, the said issue cannot be re-agitated. Accordingly, the co-ordinate Bench transferred the matter to this Court which has passed the Order dated 13.11.2025. 4. On 13.11.2025 this Court had only issued summons in the Suit and had granted ex-parte ad-interim injunction in favour of the Plaintiff. A perusal of the Order dated 13.11.2025 does not reflect any discussion whatsoever by this Court on I.A. 28035/2025 seeking waiver of pre- institution mediation. The order neither records any reasons nor contains any operative direction allowing the said Application. In the absence of any adjudication, it cannot be presumed that the Application stood allowed. The submission made on behalf of the Plaintiff before the co-ordinate Bench that the Application had already been allowed is, therefore, factually incorrect. The Application was overlooked by this Court. Therefore, learned Counsel for the Plaintiff could not have made a submission that the Application for waiver of pre-institution mediation was allowed by this Court on 13.11.2025. 5. Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 mandates that a Commercial Suit which does not contemplate any urgent interim relief shall not be instituted unless the remedy of pre-institution mediation has first been This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/07/2026 at 14:45:39 CS(COMM) 1206/2025 Page 3 of 4 exhausted. The Apex Court, in a number of Judgments, has held that Section 12A is mandatory and that a commercial suit instituted without exhausting the remedy of pre-institution mediation is liable to rejection under Order VII Rule 11(d) CPC. Reliance is placed on the Judgments of the Apex Court in Patil Automation Pvt. Ltd. v. Rakheja Engineers Pvt. Ltd., (2022) 10 SCC 1; Dhanbad Fuels Ltd. v. State of Jharkhand, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1129 & K.S. Bhoopathy v. Kokila, (2000) 5 SCC 458, wherein the Apex Court has held that Section 12A is mandatory and that a commercial suit instituted without exhausting the remedy of pre-institution mediation is liable to rejection under Order VII Rule 11(d) CPC. 6. In the present case, once it is held that no order waiving the requirement of pre-institution mediation was ever passed, the institution of the present Suit without first complying with Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act cannot be sustained. The statutory bar contained in Section 12A, therefore, squarely operates and the present Plaint is liable to be rejected under Order VII Rule 11(d) CPC. 7. At this stage, learned Counsel appearing for Defendants fairly submits, on instructions, that in the event the Plaintiff is relegated to the remedy of pre-institution mediation, the Defendants shall, during the pendency of such mediation proceedings, not alienate, transfer, create any third-party rights, part with possession of, or otherwise encumber the Suit Property. The said statement is taken on record and the Defendants shall remain bound thereby. 8. In view of the above discussion, I.A. 9449/2026 is allowed. Consequently, the Plaint is rejected under Order VII Rule 11(d) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for non-compliance with the mandatory This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/07/2026 at 14:45:39 CS(COMM) 1206/2025 Page 4 of 4 requirement contained in Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. 9. It is, however, clarified that the rejection of the Plaint shall not preclude the Plaintiff from availing the remedy of pre-institution mediation in accordance with Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. In the event the mediation proceedings culminate in a non-settlement report or otherwise fail in accordance with law, it shall be open to the Plaintiff to institute fresh proceedings in accordance with law. It is made clear that this Court has not made any observations on the merits of the case. 10. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J JULY 24, 2026 Rahul This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/07/2026 at 14:45:39