IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
PRADEEP SINGH YERUR, J.
Sri. Palakolanu Sudhakar Reddy, S/o. Krishna Redy – Appellant
Versus
Smt.Chunchu Sandhya Rani, W/o. Chunchu Rama Krishna – Respondent
Writ Petition No. 22346 Of 2025 (GM-CPC)
Decided On : 04-11-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of reliefs sought in writ petition. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 2. analysis of applications and court's reasoning. (Para 6 , 9 , 10) |
| 3. contentions of petitioners and respondents. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 4. ruling on necessity for fresh hearings. (Para 12 , 14) |
| 5. final order and remittance to lower court. (Para 16) |
ORDER :
PRADEEP SINGH YERUR, J.
1. Heard learned senior counsel - Sri Suresh Lokre alongwith learned counsel - Sri Shravan S. Lokre for petitioner and learned Counsel - Sri S.V. Giridhar for Respondent Nos.1 and2.
2. Parties shall be referred to as per their ranking before the Commercial Court.
3. This petition is filed by the petitioners/defendant Nos.1 and 2 seeking the following reliefs:
"a) Issue a writ of certiorari or of any other nature to set aside the impugned orders passed under I.A No.1 and 2 by the XI Additional District and Sessions Judge (dedicated commercial court) Bangalore rural district, Bangalore dated 24/06/2025 in commercial O.S.No.134/2025 (ANNEXURE-A)
b) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other nature directing the XI Additional District and Sessions Judge (dedicated commercial court) Bangalore rural district, Bangalore dated 24/06/2025 in Commercial O.S. No.134/2025 to return the plaint and direct the compliance of Pre- Institution Mediation as contemplated under Sec.12-A of the Commercial Courts Act.
c) Award the costs and grant such other relief(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and necessary in the above Writ Petition in the interest of justice and equity."
4. The respondents/plaintiffs filed a suit against the petitioners/defendants in Commercial O.S. No.134/2025 seeking the following reliefs.
"Wherefore, the Plaintiffs pray that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to pass a Judgement and Decree in favour of the Plaintiffs and against the Defendants as under:
(a) Decree of Ejectment directing the Defendants to quit and deliver the vacant possession of the Schedule Property forthwith, failing which the Plaintiffs shall be at liberty to secure the vacant possession of the Schedule Property through the process of the Court at the cost of the Defendants;
(b) A Money Decree directing the Defendants to pay to the Plaintiffs a sum of Rs.44.27,940/ [Rupees Forty Four Lakhs Twenty Seven Thousand Nine Hundred and Forty Only] towards the arrears of rent, damages and interest due to the Plaintiffs on account of the delay in payment of the rents and damages together with current and future interest thereon @ 24% per annum with effect from the date of the institution of the suit till the date of payment in entirety:
(c) A Decree of Damages directing the Defendants to effect payment of a sum of Rs.4,50,000/- [Rupees Four Lakh Fifty Thousand Only] per month or part thereof to the Plaintiffs for the use and occupation of the Schedule Property post the termination of tenancy as "tenant of sufferance" from the date of institution of the suit till the delivery of the vacant possession of the Schedule Property, failing which a Money Decree be passed for the payment of the same together with current and future interest thereon @ 24% per annum to be computed with effect from the respective due dates of the damages till the date of realisation;
(d) Pass an Order for an enquiry for payment of additional mesne profits in an appropriate Final Decree Proceedings in terms of Order XX Rule 12 of the Code of Civil Procedure, to be computed from the date of filing of this suit till the date of delivery of possession of the Schedule Property in excess @ 4,50,000/- [Rupees Four Lakh Fifty Thousand Only] per month or part thereof with current and future interest @24% per annum;
(e) For an Order as to the costs of the present proceedings, and
(f) For such other Order/Orders as this Hon'ble Court deems fit for grant under the circumstances of the case;
in the interest of justice and equity."
5. Along with the plaint, the plaintiff filed two applications - I.A. No.I and I.A. No.II.
5.1 I.A. No.I is filed under Order XXXVIII Rule 5 r/w Section
Procedural fairness in judicial orders is essential; orders issued without proper notice and opportunity to the affected parties are unsustainable in law.
Pre-litigation mediation under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act is mandatory; however, if mediation has occurred prior to suit registration, further mediation is not required.
The mandatory requirement of pre-institution mediation under Section 12-A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 must be complied with for a suit to be maintainable.
A plaintiff must establish a prima facie case for attachment before judgment, ensuring no asset disposal occurs that could obstruct potential recovery, as underscored by Order 38 Rules 5 and 6 of CPC....
Recovery of amount – Attachment of property – Void as the property subject matter of the suit not standing in the name of the first defendant, as the entire claim in the suit was against the first de....
Satisfaction of the Court is a pre-requisite for grant of conditional attachment under Order XXXVIII, Rule 5 of CPC. Failure to comply with the requirements of Order XXXVIII, Rule 5 of CPC renders th....
The court ruled that adequate notice was served to the defendants, and the suit was commercial in nature, but the decree could not be set aside due to alternative remedies available under the Code of....
Alternate judge cannot hear review under Order XLVII Rule 5 CPC if original judge available post short leave; violation invalidates exparte review order lacking notice and grounds, distinguishing fro....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.