Bank Can Adjust OTS Deposit on Borrower Default, No Cheating u/s 420 IPC: Delhi High Court
02 Mar 2026
Divij Kumar Quits CMS INDUSLAW for Independent Practice
03 Mar 2026
Global Lawyers Debate AI Liability in Autonomous Vehicles
03 Mar 2026
CCPA Fines Startup ₹8 Lakh for False Child Growth Claims
05 Mar 2026
Madras High Court Scoffs at Police Custody Injury Claim
05 Mar 2026
India's Criminal Investigations Face Systemic Conviction Crisis
05 Mar 2026
Kerala HC Slams TDB Financial Discipline in Ayyappa Conclave, Orders Auditor Report on Past Anomalies: High Court of Kerala
06 Mar 2026
ST Members Can Invoke Section 13B HMA If Hinduised By Customs: Chhattisgarh High Court
06 Mar 2026
Lease Cancellation Valid Even by 'In-Charge' Mining Officer Under OMMC Rules: Orissa High Court
06 Mar 2026
Back
Next 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
M.NAGAPRASANNA
Viswas textile processors – Appellant
Versus
ICICI Bank Limited – Respondent
Headnote: Read headnote
ORDER :
M.NAGAPRASANNA, J.
The petitioner - plaintiff is before this Court calling in question an order dated 30.08.2022 by which the concerned Court rejects the plea of the petitioner - plaintiff that the dispute is a commercial dispute within the meaning of Section 2 (1)(c) of the COMMERCIAL COURTS ACT , 2015 ('the Act for short)and therefore as to be tried by the Commercial Court.
2. Heard Shri Hemanth R. Rao, learned counsel and Shri Rukkoji Rao H.S., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Shri Jai M. Patil, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1.
3. The facts in brief germane are as follows:
The plaintiff is a partnership firm in the business of garment processing and manufacturing. The defendant No.1 is a banking company and other defendants are employees of the banking
Misappropriation of funds from a current account qualifies as a commercial dispute under Section 2(1)(c) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, allowing the Commercial Court to have jurisdiction over th....
Disputes involving banking transactions can be categorized as commercial under Section 2(1)(c) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, based on the nature of the transaction.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the strict interpretation of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 to determine the qualification of a dispute as a commercial suit.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the strict interpretation of the term 'commercial dispute' under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, and the necessity to satisfy specific conditio....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of what constitutes a 'commercial dispute' under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, and how the specific nature of the transact....
A dispute must arise from ordinary transactions of merchants, bankers, financiers, and traders to qualify as a commercial dispute under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015.
Return of Plaint – Summary Suit – Only disputes which are in nature of ordinary transactions of merchants, financiers and traders will fall within purview of commercial disputes.
The court held that a suit involving fixed deposits and allegations of fraud constitutes a commercial dispute under the Commercial Courts Act, and such a suit is maintainable despite fraud claims.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
Listen Article