 Out of Court settlement mechanism in India

Out of court settlement is done through a process called “Alternative Disputes Resolution
(ADR)”. Alternative Disputes Resolution is a generic term that refers to a wide array of
practices, the purpose of which is to manage and quickly resolve disagreements at lower cost.

The term ADR also refers to any means of setting disputes outside the formal courts/tribunals
established by the state in exercise of its sovereign function to decide disputes between
citizens and also disputes between itself and citizen.

ADR originated in the USA in a drive to find alternatives to the traditional legal system. The
use of ADR has grown tremendously in the International business field in recent years.

There is a long and old tradition in India of the encouragement of the dispute resolution
outside the formal legal system. Disputes were resolved by the NyayaPanchayat at grass-root
level.

When we compare ADR with the Courts, We come to see that ADR methods are cost savings
for parties and courts. They give early resolution of disputes. They are more satisfying
procedure for disputes resolutions. The outcome reflects the party’s interests and values. The
litigant’s get more amount of satisfaction and compliance with result.

The courts are backlogged with dockets resulting in delay of year or more for the parties to
have their cases heard and decided. To solve this problem of delayed justice the
ADRmechanisms has been developed in response thereof. This is also based on the principle
of “Justice delayed is justice denied”.

The Indian Parliament has amended the Civil Procedure Code by inserting Section 89 as well
as Order 10 Rule 1-A to 1-C. Section 89 thereof provides for the settlement of dispute outside
the court.

According to Section there are five types of ADR mechanism i.e. Arbitration, Conciliation,
Mediation, Judicial Settlement and LokAdalat.

1.) Arbitration- It is a form of ADR, is a technique for the resolution of disputes outside the
courts, where the parties to dispute refer it to one or more persons-arbitrations, by whose
decision they agree to be bound. It is a resolution technique in which a third party reviews the
evidence in a case and imposes a decision that is legally binding for both sides and
enforceable. It can be either voluntary or mandatory. There are limited rights of review and
appeal of arbitration award.

2.)Conciliation-It is an ADR process, whereby the parties to a dispute use a conciliator, who
meets the parties separately in order to resolve their differences. It is a voluntary proceeding,
where the parties involved are free to agree and attempt to resolve their dispute by
conciliation. The process is flexible, allowing parties to define the time, structure and content
of the conciliation proceedings.

3.)Mediation- It is a simple, voluntary and informal, party centred and structured negotiation
process, where a neutral third party assists the parties in amicable resolving their disputes by
using specified communication and negotiation technique. It is a process where it is
controlled by the parties themselves. The mediator only acts as a facilitator in helping the
parties to reach a negotiated settlement of their dispute. The mediator makes no decisions and
does not impose his view of what a fair settlement should be.

4.)Judicial Settlement- It is not defined anywhere. But, in view of the provisions of Section
89 of the code of Civil Procedure, the case can be referred to judicial settlement then the
provisions of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 will apply. It means that in a Judicial
Settlement the concerned Judge tries to settle the disputes between the parties amicably.

5.)LokAdalat- The concept of LokAdalat is a process to settle disputes through conciliation

and compromise. It is a judicial institution and a dispute settlement agency developed by the
people themselves for social justice based on settlement or compromised reached through
systematic negotiation. Section 89 of the CPC also provides as to referring the pending Civil
disputes to the LokAdalat. When the matter is referred to the LokAdalat then the provisions
of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 will apply.
  Difference between Arbitration and Conciliation proceedings and its
relevance in Commercial disputes

The differences between Arbitration and conciliation can be drawn clearly on the following
grounds:-

1.) Arbitration is the process by which parties select an independent person, who renders a
decision regarding the case. Conversely, Conciliation attempts to make parties come to an
agreement, about the problem at hand.

2.) In Arbitration, an arbitrator has the power to enforce his decision similar to a judgement of
a court. Whereas, in case of Conciliation, a conciliator do not have the power to enforce his
decision.

3.) Arbitration requires a prior agreement between the parties known as arbitration agreement,
which must be in writing. As against this, the process of Conciliation does not require any
prior agreement.

4.) Arbitration is available for the current and future disputes. Whereas, the Conciliation can
be adopted for existing disputes only.

5.) Arbitration is like a courtroom proceeding, wherein witnesses, evidence, cross-

examination, transcripts and legal counsel are used. On the contrary, Conciliation is an
informal way of resolving disputes between the management and labour.

6.) Arbitrators are not permitted to discuss the issues directly with the parties or generate
options for terms of settlement or negotiation. Whereas, a conciliator is allowed to discuss
issues in disputes, develop options and consider alternatives to help the parties achieve a
mutually agreeable outcome.

7.) An arbitral award is final and binding and has the effect of terminating the arbitral
proceedings. Whereas, conciliation does not always ensure a mutually agreeable outcome will
arise between the parties.
Arbitration and Conciliation can be utilised for both private and commercial disputes and
both employ an impartial person to assist the disputing parties in resolving or narrowing the
issues between them.

The term ‘Commercial Dispute’ has been given an inclusive definition, with the intent to,
include almost all disputes that could entail with respect to a ‘commercial transaction’
understood in the most generic way. As such the definition broadly includes disputes relating
to transactions between merchants, bankers, etc. and also includes disputes in relation to
shareholders agreements, mercantile documents, partnership agreements, joint venture
agreements, intellectual property rights, insurance, etc.

Commercial disputes are always harmful to all employees, society, management, government,
etc. resulting in loss of revenue, production, profit and much more. However, it is the
employees who are worst affected by the commercial disputes, as the consequences would be
a lockout which may lead to a loss of wages and even jobs. In commercial disputes we can
take example of Industrial disputes, industries are the backbone of the economy, and the strife
may collapse. So, the settlement of the industrial disputes should be done as soon as possible.

Arbitration and conciliation are two such methods of resolving commercial disputesout of the
court.
 Case Report On “Jyoti Structures Ltd.(Claimant) V. Power Grid
Corporation Of India Limited (Respondent)”.

Presiding arbitrator-Justice S.S. Nijjar

Co-arbitrator- Mr. R.S. Mathur

Co-arbitrator-Ciccu Mukhopadhaya

Fact of the Case

This case concerns the dispute which arose between Jyoti Structures Ltd. And PGCIL
pursuant to two letters of Award issued by the PGCIL dated 26 May, 2006 bearing reference
numbers C-46011-L195A/LOA/12069 and C-46011-L195A/LOA-88/2017 for supply and
erection respectively of transmission lines associated with the Barh-Balia transmission
system.

The Contract documents included, inter alia, the LOA dated 26 May, 2006; the Conditions of
contract; General conditions of contract; Special conditions of contract; Erection conditions
of contract and the bid documents.

The fact of the case are:-

1.) In case of any disputes both the parties will go for arbitration.

2.) The work for supply and erection of transmission lines must be completed in 26 months.

3.) One of the relevant clause of the was that “ if any dispute or difference of any kind,
whatsoever shall arise between the owner and the contractor, arising out of the contract for
performance of the works whether during the progress of the works or after its completion or
whether or after the termination, abandonment or breach of the contract, it shall, in the first
place, be referred to and settled by the engineer, who within a period of 30 days after being
requested by either party to do so, shall give written notice of his decision to the owner and
the contractor.

4.) It was not mentioned in the contract that early supplies of equipment or advance payment
or early completion of work would resultin breach of contract.

5.) Work must be completed in 26 months.

Issue of the case

1.) The first issue is related to the early supplies of equipment and advance payment made by
the PGCIL.

2.) No objection was raised by the respondent pointing out that supplies were being made in
advance.

3.) The other issue is related to the early completion of L1 Project i.e. of Barh-Balia
transmission line from the given date.

4.) Late completion of L2 project i.e. Balia-Koilwar project.

5.) Respondent has not referred to engineer for counter claim for liquidated damage.

6.) Delay in work completion i.e. of 23 months.

Related case laws

1.) KailashNath and Associates V. D.D.A. (2015).

In this case Hon’ble Supreme Court said that L.D. Under Section 74 has to be those damages
which could be recovered Under Section 73 of the Indian Contract Act. In other words, if
Section 73 bars consequential or remote damages, L.D. would not be recoverable or payable
in respect of such consequential or remote loss suffered by a party.

2.) Taneja Skins V. Corporation (Delhi High Court).

3.) Fateh Chand V. BalkishanDass (SC 1964).

4.) MaulaBux V. Union of India (SC 1969).

5.) ONGC Ltd. V. Saw pipes Ltd. (SC 2003).

Judgment given by Tribunal

The Claimant is therefore entitled to the following amounts from the Respondent and the
declaration regarding the Maithon contract:-

1.) That the Respondent pay the Claimant a sum of Rs.5,33,29,000/- towards the balance of
contract price carrying simple interest @9.5% per annum with effect from 1 Nov, 2011 till the
date of payment.

2.) That the Respondent pay to the Claimant an amount of Rs.26,75,000/- towards bank
guarantee and insurance premium cost incurred carrying simple interest @9.5% per annum
with effect from 1 Jan, 2014 till the date of payment.

3.) Cost of Rs.78,56,885/- which will carry simple interest @9.5% with effect from 60 days
after the award is received by the respondent and until payment.

4.) The Tribunal declares that the Respondent was not entitled to deduct or withheld the sum
of Rs.1,42,97,809/- from the amounts due to the Claimant under the Maithon contract.

This award is being issued on a stamp paper of Rs.100/- the Claimant shall duly stamp the
award, if so required, in accordance with law.

Introduction
On 23 October 2015, the President of India promulgated the Commercial Courts, Commercial
Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Ordinance, 2015. The
Ordinance provides for the constitution of Commercial Courts, and the establishment of
Commercial Divisions and Commercial Appellate Divisions within High Courts to adjudicate
‘Commercial Disputes’. The Ordinance amends certain provisions of the Civil Procedure
Code, 1908, to the extent applicable to ‘Commercial Disputes’ and also prescribes timelines
to streamline the conduct of such ‘Commercial Disputes’.

The enactment of the Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate
Division of the High Court’s Act, 2015 act as a catalyst for achieving the objective of its pet
programme. The government also appears to be serious to make litigation less cumbersome
and expeditious by introduction of the Act. The Act mirrors and affirms similar principles of
law reflected in various statues of developed countries which ensure a speedy legal recourse.
The Act received assent of the President of India on December 31, 2015. However, the Act is
deemed to be in force since October 23, 2015.

The efficiency of the legal system and the pace at which disputes are resolved by courts are
very important factors in deciding the growth of investment and the overall economic and
social development of a country. The inefficiency of our justice delivery system is well
known and well documented. The Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and
Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Act, 2015 ("Act") is an important step taken
by the Government to expedite the justice delivery system at least as regards commercial
disputes.

The Act essentially introduces setting up of a Commercial Court at District level and in view
of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, all matters pertaining to international
commercial arbitrations involving disputes of subject matter of value of more than Rs.1 Crore
have been brought within the ambit of the High Courts and thus such matters pertaining to
international commercial arbitrations are to be heard and disposed by the commercial
division.

Background
The need for such a model of courts was addressed way back in the 188th Law Commission
Report published in 2003. The report stressed on the need for having technologically
equipped fast track commercial divisions in High Courts, to address the rise in high value
litigation as an off-spring of liberalization and privatization. It also looked into the feasibility
of systems such as e-courts, e-filing, video conferencing in the Commercial Divisions
emulating the models abroad. The Cabinet in the year 2009 introduced the Commercial
Division of High Courts Bill, 2009 which was examined in detail by the Select Committee of
the Rajya Sabha and subsequently by the 253rd Law Commission Report.

The 253rd Law Commission Report, which focuses on the 2015 legislation, draws its ground
from the shortcomings of the 2009 Bill. The difficulties of lack of original jurisdiction in all
High Courts, differences in pecuniary limits within the same Court, heavy backlog of cases
and transfer of cases have been discussed in the light of the 2015 legislation in the Report.

Both the law commission reports refer to the existing and successful models in countries like
UK, USA, Singapore and eleven others. The purpose of the Commercial courts in the UK
was to provide a simplified procedure for the mercantile community with briefer procedures
and experienced judges. Similar objectives could be traced to the establishment of first set of
Commercial Courts in New York in USA. Within a short period of five years, (1993-1998),
the New York Courts reported a 36% reduction in the average time to dispose cases and
reduction in the number of days taken to settle a case from 648 to 412 days. Other countries
such as Scotland, Manila and Singapore have achieved expected results by adopting
Commercial Courts Divisions in their respective Judicial Systems.

Commercial dispute
The term ‘Commercial Dispute’ has been given an inclusive definition, with the intent to,
include almost all disputes that could entail with respect to a ‘commercial transaction’
understood in the most generic way. As such the definition broadly includes disputes relating
to transactions between merchants, bankers, financiers, traders, etc. and also includes disputes
in relation to shareholders agreements, mercantile documents, partnership agreements, joint
venture agreements, intellectual property rights, insurance, etc. The Act attempts to cover a
broad range of disputes within the scope of a 'commercial dispute'. It also clarifies that a
dispute shall not cease to be commercial dispute merely because it may involve action for
recovery of immoveable property or for realization of monies out of immovable property
given as security or one of the contracting parties is the State or a private body carrying out
public functions. To curb litigations on the issue whether a particular dispute is a commercial
dispute or not, not only at the Commercial Court level but also in appellate forum, the Act
provides that if the Commercial Court were to hold in favour of its jurisdiction and treats a
particular dispute as a commercial dispute, such a decision cannot be challenged in the
Appellate forum on the basis that such a ruling would not actually cause any prejudice to the
opposite party.

Constitution of Commercial Court, Commercial Division and Commercial

Appellate Division
The Act constitutes a two layer set-up, i.e.

1.) The Commercial Courts/Commercial Divisions; and s

2.) The Commercial Appellate Divisions.

Commercial Courts will be constituted in every district in all states and union territories
where the High Court of that state or union territory does not have/exercise ordinary original
civil jurisdiction. At present, only five High Courts exercise ordinary original civil
jurisdiction – the High Courts of Delhi, Bombay, Madras, Calcutta and Himachal Pradesh.
Therefore, in all other states and union territories, Commercial Courts will now adjudicate
upon Commercial Disputes.

Where High Courts do not have ordinary original civil jurisdiction the State Governments are
to set-up Commercial Courts at the District level; and wherever the High Courts have
ordinary original civil jurisdiction, the Chief Justice is to set-up a Commercial Division bench
presided by a single judge.

The Commercial Appellate Division presided by bench of two judges is to be constituted by

the Chief Justice of each of the High Courts, to hear appeals from decisions of the
Commercial Court or Commercial Division. These divisions will be set up in every High
Court to hear appeals against (i) orders of Commercial Division of High Court; and (ii) orders
of Commercial Courts. The appeal has to be filed within sixty days from the date of
judgment. The Commercial Appellate Division is required to dispose of such an appeal within
six months from the date of filing such Appeal. However, the Ordinance does not mention a
statutory right to appeal to the Supreme Court from an order of the Commercial Appellate
Division.

The Act also bars any revision application filed against any interlocutory orders passed by
Commercial Court.

Interestingly, the Commercial Courts have been made equivalent to the Commercial Division
of a High Court as an appeal from the order of such Commercial Court is directed to
Commercial Appellate Division of the concerned High Court.

At present, although there are no specialized designated commercial courts which hear
Commercial Disputes, certain judges at the district court level predominantly hear
Commercial Disputes. Similarly, in the five High Courts which exercise ordinary original
civil jurisdiction in India, there are designated judges who hear Commercial Disputes. Such
designated judges at the district court level and the High Court level, however, do not hear
commercial matters exclusively. The Ordinance proposes to constitute and establish
Specialized Commercial Courts to hear only Commercial Disputes.

Amendments to CPC

In order to streamline the procedure of trial to be followed by the Courts in respect to a

Commercial dispute, the Civil Procedure, 1908,that is to be applicable to the Commercial
Disputes is also be amended to the extent as specified in the schedule of the Act. Some of
theimportant amendments are highlighted herein below:-

 Strict timelines for filling written statement and forfeiture of right to file written
statement after completion of one twenty days of the service of summons is
prescribed. Furthermore, denials in the written statement are to be made in the
prescribed manner, which includes particulars of the allegation that Defendant denies
but requires the Plaintiff to prove and the ones that he admits. The Defendant is also
to state reasons for denying any fact and put forward his version of event.
 The Ordinance has introduced a new provision in the CPC, which prescribes that a
Commercial Court or a Commercial Division will hold a ‘case management hearing’
to frame issues and fix timelines, as noted below, to ensure that the case is concluded
in an expeditious and efficient manner.
 Any party can apply for summary judgement, in respect to a claim which can be
decided without recording oral evidence, at any time before the issues are framed.
 The ordinance has also introduced comprehensive provisions in the CPC dealing with
award of actual costs and interest. The amended provisions of the CPC also provide
the issues that Specialized Commercial Courts may consider while imposing costs on
parties. The earlier provisions under the CPC dealing with costs and interest, provided
for imposition of only nominal costs.
 Timely procedure for disclosures, discovery and inspection of documents are
prescribed.
 The amended provisions of the CPC allow parties to apply for summary judgement
where the court could arrive at a decision solely on the basis of written pleadings.
 Statement of admission and denial of all documents is to be completed within fifteen
days from completion of inspections or any later date as fixed by the Court.
 Concept of case management hearing, which includes framing of issues, fixing of
procedure and timelines are to be followed in a suit (including setting timeline for
parties/advocate to address written and oral arguments). Closure of arguments not
later than six months from the date of first case management hearing are prescribed.
 Provision of imposing cost for frivolous suits and counter claims are provided.
 Recording of evidence on day to day basis.
 Affidavit of evidence of all witnesses to be led by parties is now required to be filed
simultaneously.
 Filling of written arguments by parties is made compulsory.
 Pronouncement of judgement is to be completed within ninety days of conclusion of
arguments.
The Ordinance, while amending the provisions of the CPC, has also introduced strict
timelines to ensure prompt resolution of disputes, in the following manner:

 The maximum period for filing a written statement has been set at 120 days upon the
expiry of which the defendant’s right to file a written statement shall stand forfeited.

 All appeals to the Commercial Appellate Division must be made within a period of 60
days from the date of the impugned judgment and the appellate division must
endeavor to dispose of the same within 6 months from when it is filed.

 A plaintiff seeking to adduce additional documents must make an application for the
same within 30 days of filing the suit.

 All applications seeking leave to deliver interrogatories must be decided within 7 days
from the date on which they are filed.

 Interrogatories shall be answered by affidavit to be filed within 10 days; however

such period is extendable by the court.

 All parties must complete inspection of all documents disclosed within 30 days of the
filing of the written statement.

 Any directions sought by parties for inspection of documents must be disposed of

within 30 days of filing an application for such directions.

 Inspection of documents must be completed within 5 days of the passing of an order

allowing inspection.

 Parties must submit their statements of admission/denial of all disclosed documents

within 15 days of completion of the inspection. The court however has the discretion
to fix any other such time as it deems fit for submission of these statements.

 Any party served with a notice to produce documents may be given up to 15 days to
submit the relevant documents.

 The first case management hearing is to be held within four weeks from the
submission of admission/denial of documents by all parties to the suit.
  Arguments must be concluded within 6 months from the date of the first case
management hearing

 Written arguments under distinct heads are to be submitted by the parties within 4
weeks of the commencement of oral arguments. Thereafter, the court may allow
revised written arguments to be filed within one week after conclusion of oral
arguments.

 The court must pronounce judgment within 90 days of conclusion of arguments.

The Act also clarifies that in case of conflict with any of the provisions of CPC, as amended
by this Act, with any provisions of any rule of jurisdictional High Court or any state
amendment to the CPC, the provisions of CPC, as amended by this Act, is to prevail.
Recent Cases related to Commercial disputes

1.) Superon Schweisstechnik India vs. Modi Hitech India Ltd. (Delhi High Court, 2 April
2018)

In the present case the trademark of plaintiff is SUPERON and the additional trademark of
which ownerhip is claimed by the plaintiff. Plaintiff pleads that the defendant has dishonestly
adopted an identical trademark VAC-PAC for the same goods being welding electrodes.

The Court said that the present suit is a gross abuse of process of law. Court imposes cost on
the plaintiff in favour of the defendant by applying Section 35, CPC.

2.) Varanasi Builders And Developers vs. State of U.P. And 2 Others (Allahabad High Court,
6 December 2016)

3.) O.N.G.C vs. Saw Pipes (S.C. 17 April 2003)

The arbitral tribunal held that the appellant has wrongfully withheld the agreed amount of US
$ 3,04,970.20 and Rs. 15,75,559/- on account of customs duty, sales tax, freight charges
deducted by the way of liquidated damages. The arbitral tribunal further held that the
respondent was entitled to recover the said amount with interest at the rate of 12 per cent p.a.
from 1st April 1997 till the date of the filing of statement of claim.
Analysis of the Act

The Act is a laudable piece of legislation and a step in the right direction. The spirit behind
the amendments to the CPC is also appreciable. However, there is justified scepticism as to
whether the Act and the amendments to the CPC will really work on ground in the way it is
envisaged. The definition of commercial dispute though covers various categories of disputes,
to curb litigation on the question as to whether a particular dispute is a commercial dispute at
all, it would perhaps have been appropriate to define commercial disputes in the negative, by
listing those which would not be commercial in nature such as matrimonial disputes,
succession disputes, etc.

The definition of commercial dispute as it stands gives potential for debates and issues to
arise as to whether a dispute is a commercial dispute at all. In some ways, the definition also
does not display any rationale. Further, as regards disputes arising out of agreements relating
to immovable property, the qualification that the property must be used exclusively in trade
or commerce could raise debates as to whether the property must have been in use for trade
or commerce before an agreement is entered into or whether it would also cover agreements
entered into for the purpose of exploiting immovable property for the first time for
commercial purposes. The entry dealing with disputes pertaining to intellectual property
rights does not seem to cover or include disputes pertaining to breach of confidentiality.

Therefore, one can envisage lawyers for the defence exploiting vagueness in these definitions
to question the jurisdiction of the Courts over a particular dispute and this may prolong trial.
Since commercial disputes only of the value of Rs.1 Crore and above can be raised in the
Courts, there could similarly be jurisdictional issues raised on the basis of valuation.

A distinct drawback of the present legislation is the adoption of the US principles pertaining
to discovery of documents. The process of discovery proves to be painful and costly, which is
one of the reasons why parties in the western common law countries move away from courts
and adopt arbitration, is well known.

The procedures as available in the CPC were sufficient to allow discovery and production of
documents in all just cases and where found necessary. However, the present amendment to
the CPC casts an onus on the parties by providing that all the documents in their power
possession, control or custody relating to any matter in question in the proceedings, whether
it is in support of or adverse to their claim, should be filed along with their pleadings, and
further require the parties to make a declaration on oath at the time of filing of their pleadings
that they do not have any other document with them pertaining to the facts and circumstances
of the proceedings.

Further, no express exception has been made for such production either on the grounds of
privilege or confidentiality etc. Just as has been the case in the US, it is likely that such broad
requirement of discovery would become a tool for harassment by parties here and would
become a factor in deciding whether to settle matters or face the pain of discovery.

The amendment of provisions dealing with costs still leave discretion with the judges and one
cannot expect a dramatic change in the extent of cost that would be imposed by the Courts.
The setting out of detailed provisions for the manner in which affidavits are to be filed, the
contents of affidavit, provision for striking of portions of the affidavit, etc. are likely to lead
to more applications by either parties seeking the Courts to exercise its powers purportedly
for ensuring compliance with these detailed procedures, but obviously with a view to further
prolong trial.

Finally, unless Commercial Courts are set up in all the districts by all States within a short
span of time, sufficient number of judges are appointed to the Courts, appropriate
infrastructure is provided, salary of judges are dramatically increased to attract better
talented, trained and competent persons who are selected, based on merit, to head these
courts, and there is a change in the very mind-set and attitude of both the judges and the
lawyers functioning in the Courts, it may turn out that the object of the Act may not be
achieved at all.

The Act will change the cumbersome process of the court. It shall not only change the speed
at which Commercial Disputes will attain finality, but also improve the perception of
investors about India as an investment destination. A few amendments of the CPC applicable
to the Act, in my viewshould be made applicable to all Courts in India. While the need of
Commercial Courts is obvious in India, the institution of such Courts should be seen as a
stepping-stone to reform the civil justice system in India. We hope that the Act is
implemented in its true spirit by all the states and High Courts of the country, so that it
achieves its object.
Conclusion

The Act will change the cumbersome process of the court. It shall not only change the speed
at which Commercial Disputes will attain finality, but also improve the perception of
investors about India as an investment destination. A few amendments of the CPC applicable
to the Act, in my view should be made applicable to all Courts in India. While the need of
Commercial Courts is obvious in India, the institution of such Courts should be seen as a
stepping-stone to reform the civil justice system in India. We hope that the Act is
implemented in its true spirit by all the states and High Courts of the country, so that it
achieves its object.

The Act could, in the long run, change the reasons why the Courts in India are frowned upon
such as its long drawn and cumbersome processes. It shall not only change the speed at which
Commercial Disputes will attain finality, but also improve the perception of investors about
India as an investment destination. The concept of the ‘case management hearing’ is akin to
the procedure followed by international arbitration centre wherein timelines are fixed at the
outset, which has to be appreciated. A few amendments of the CPC applicable to the Act, in
our view, should be made applicable to all Courts in India. While the need for commercial
courts is obvious in India, the institution of such courts should be seen as a stepping-stone to
reforming the civil justice system in India. We hope that the Act is implemented in its true
spirit by all the states and High Courts of the Country, so that it achieves its object.

The efficiency of the legal system and the pace at which disputes are resolved by courts are
very important factors in deciding the growth of investment and the overall economic and
social development of a country. The inefficiency of our justice delivery system is well
known and well documented. The Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and
Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Act, 2015 ("Act") is an important step taken
by the Government to expedite the justice delivery system at least as regards commercial
disputes.
 POWER GRID CORPORATION OF INDIA
LIMITED E.R.-1 PATNA

Internship Report on the Topic: “Implication of Commercial

Court Act, 2015”

Under the Supervision of:

Mr. Ashish Tripathi And Mr. Bheem Singh

(Law Officer)

Submitted by

SHIVAM SAKET

Central University of South Bihar

B.A.LL.B. (6th Sem.)

Enrollment No. CUSB1513125043

 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

An enterprise of such a magnitude as this research on “ “Implication of Commercial Court

Act, 2015” could only fructify in such a short span of time due to the coalescing of able
guidance and support of many learned and able persons, whose efforts and cooperation, I as
the researcher, with a sense of gratitude, being duty bound too, acknowledge in no particular
order. My deepest gratitude and thanks to the Hon’ble mentors and internship guide Mr.
Ashish Triathi and Mr. Bheem Singh, Law Officer, Power Grid Corporation of India Limited
Eastern Region-1, Patna, an eminent officer and scholar gave enough time and space for free
exchange of ideas and, opinions greatly benefiting me in augmentation and critiquing of
many of the opinions which find their place in this work.

Despite the busy schedule and onerous office responsibilities, he gave me ample time
whenever he was approached for his invaluable guidance. I would like to extend my sincere
thanks to my fellow intern for his review and honest remarks. Last, but not the least my
eternal gratitude is due, to my loving Parents whose constant unflinching support, blessings
and encouragement both, temporal and emotional support, to meet any challenge with
confidence including, of this purposive academic exercise.
CONTENT

SERIAL NUMBER TOPIC PAGE NUMBER

1. Introduction 4

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.