HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON’BLE JUSTICE MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA AND THE HON’BLE JUSTICE GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.199 OF 2026 DATE: 23.01.2026 Between M/s. Earthcare Infra Private Limited, Rep. by its Director K. Kiran Kumar and another.

…Petitioners And Mrs. Uma Rani Moldenhawer, D/o. K. Venkata Raja Rao.

…Respondent Mr. M.V. Pratap Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners.

ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya)

1. The Civil Revision Petition arises out of an order passed by the learned Commercial Court at L.B. Nagar on 08.01.2026, returning COP SR No.15 of 2026 (RE – SR No.114 of 2026) at the stage of numbering for being filed before the appropriate Court having jurisdiction on the ground that the dispute arising from the Memorandum of Understanding entered into between the parties on 24.02.2024 would not fall within the definition of a “commercial dispute” as provided under section 2(1)(c)(vi) of The Commercial Courts Act, 2015 (‘the 2015 Act’). The Commercial Court returned the unnumbered SR also on the ground that the petitioners could not rely upon the undated Development Agreement-cum-General Power of Attorney (DAGPA) drafted on the basis of the MOU as it was not a signed document.

2. The unnumbered SR which was returned by the Commercial Court had been originally filed by the petitioners under section 9 of The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking interim measures of injunction against the respondent.

3. The impugned order reflects that the only argument advanced by the petitioners was based on section 2(1)(c)(vi) of the 2015 Act, whereas learned counsel appearing for the petitioners before us has primarily focused on section 2(1)(c)(xviii) of the 2015 Act which takes into account agreements for the sale of goods or provision of services.

4. Hence, in all fairness to the Commercial Court, we deem it fit to remand the matter for fresh consideration with reference to section 2(1)(c)(xviii) of the 2015 Act.

5. We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the legality of the impugned order but wish to afford another opportunity to the Commercial Court to rehear the unnumbered COP SR No.15 of 2026 (RE – SR No.114 of 2026) in light of the new arguments advanced before us.

6. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 08.01.2026 is set aside only for the limited purpose of enabling the Commercial Court to arrive at a decision based on a fresh consideration of the provisions of The Commercial Courts Act, 2015 which have been argued before us.

7. CRP No.199 of 2026, along with all connected applications, is accordingly disposed of.

There shall be no order as to costs.

MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA, J GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, J Date: 23.01.2026 NDS