2026:MHC:594 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 10.02.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR C.R.P.No.3016 of 2024 and C.M.P.No.16218 of 2024

1.M/s.B.M.B. Foundations Private Limited Rep. By its Director Arvind Bagrecha No.153, Vellala Street Purasaiwalkam, Chennai – 600 084.

2.M/s. B.M.B. Foundations Private Limitted Rep. by its Authorized Signatory No.3/225, C-Type, SIDCO Nagar

27th Street, Villivakkam, Chennai – 600 049.

3.Arvind Bagrecha ... Petitioners vs.

1.A.Mohanasundaram

2.M.Bhuvaneswari

3.M/s.Team Housing and Developers By its Proprietor V.Rameshvasan No.201, C.T.H. Road Avadi, Chennai – 600 054.

4.V.Rameshvasan ... Respondents PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set-aside the Docket Order dated 24.03.2022 passed by the Principal District Judge at Thiruvallur in O.S.(S.R.).No.6398 of 2022, subsequently numbered as O.S.No.153 of 2022, by allowing this Civil Revision Petition and consequently to return the plaint in O.S.No.153 of 2022 to be presented to the Court in which the suit should have been initiated.

For Petitioners : Mr.Ralph V.Manohar For R1 and R2 : Mr.R.Munuswamy

O R D E R

The Civil Revision Petition is filed challenging the order passed by the Principal District Judge, Thiruvallur registering the Suit as Commercial Suit by order dated 24.03.2022 in O.S.(S.R.).No.6398 of 2022, subsequently numbered as O.S.No.153 of 2022.

2. The respondents 1 and 2 herein filed a suit seeking declaration that various Sale Deeds executed by the plaintiffs in favour of the defendants 1 and 2 were null and void and for consequential relief of permanent injunction. Though the suit was originally filed as ordinary suit, the Trial Court by impugned order registered the same as a commercial suit. After entering appearance, the petitioners herein filed an application in I.A.No.4 of 2023 seeking to convert the suit from commercial suit to ordinary original suit. The said interlocutory application was dismissed by the Trial Court. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners filed a revision before this Court in C.R.P.No.1857 of 2024 and the said revision was dismissed on technical ground that the petitioners failed to challenge the earlier order passed by the Trial Court, dated 24.03.2022 registering the present suit as a commercial suit. Thereafter, the petitioners filed the present civil revision petition challenging the order dated 24.03.2022.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners by taking this Court to the definition of the expression 'Commercial Dispute' which was defined under Section 2(1)(c) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 submits that the prayer sought for in the plaint will not fit into to the definition of commercial disputes. Therefore, according to him, the Trial Court committed an error in registering the present suit as a commercial suit.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 would submit that after entering appearance, the petitioners participated in the proceeding for several months and belatedly filed an application seeking conversion of the suit as ordinary suit and the said interlocutory application was dismissed and the order passed by the Trial Court in I.A.No.4 of 2023 has been confirmed by this Court. In view of the same, the petitioners are not entitled to challenge the earlier order passed by the Court registering the suit as commercial suit.

5. Section 2(1)(c) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 reads as follows:-

“2.(1)(c) “commercial dispute” means a dispute arising out of-

(i) ordinary transactions of merchants, bankers, financiers and traders such as those relating to mercantile documents, including enforcement and interpretation of such documents;

(ii) export or import of merchandise or services;

(iii) issues relating to admiralty and maritime law;

(iv) transactions relating to aircraft, aircraft engines, aircraft equipment and helicopters, including sales, leasing and financing of the same; (v) carriage of