Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 26332 (KAR)

SRI. SHREYAS SHIBULAL v. M/S. TOTAL ENVIRONMENT PROJECTS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED

COMAP/268/2025 · 2025-05-06

C M Poonacha, R Devdas

Transfer Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:18165-DB COMAP No. 268 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF MAY, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA COMMERCIAL APPEAL NO. 268 OF 2025 BETWEEN: 1. SRI. SHREYAS SHIBULAL AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS S/O SRL. S. D. SHIBULAL R/A NO. 383, 42ND CROSS, 9TH MAIN, 5TH BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU 560 041, REP. BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, SRI. MADHUSUDHAN SRINIVASAN. 2. SMT BHAIRAVI MADHUSUDHAN SHIBULAL AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS W/O SRI. SHREYAS SHIBULAL, R/A NO. 383, 42ND CROSS, 9TH MAIN, 5TH BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU 560 041, REP. BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, SRI. MADHUSUDHAN SRINIVASAN. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. V.SRINIVASAN RAGHAVAN SR. ADVOCATE FOR SRI. NIKHILESH RAO M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. M/S. TOTAL ENVIRONMENT PROJECTS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED, A COMPANY REGISTERED Digitally signed by NIRMALA DEVI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:18165-DB COMAP No. 268 of 2025 UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF INDIAN COMPANIES ACT, 1956 HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT: "IMAGINE", NO. 78, ITPL ROAD, EPIP ZONE, WHITEFIELD, BENGALURU - 560 066, REP. BY ITS DIRECTORS. 2. SHIBANEE AND KAMAL ARCHITECTS LLP A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP REGISTERED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP, ACT, 2008 HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT "IMAGINE", NO. 78, ITPL ROAD, EPIP ZONE, WHITEFIELD, BENGALURU 560 066, REP. BY ITS DESIGNATED PARTNERS. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.DHYAN CHINNAPPA., SR. ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2) THIS COMMERCIAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 13 1A OF THE COMMERCIAL COURTS ACT, 2015 PRAYING TO ALLOW THE PRESENT APPEAL AND CONSEQUENTLY SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 02.05.2025 PASSED IN COM. AA. NO.93/2025 PASSED BY THE LXXXII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU (COMMERCIAL COURT CCH 83) i.e. ANNEXURE A. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS and HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:18165-DB COMAP No. 268 of 2025 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS) Learned counsel Sri.Mohammed Shameer has entered appearance for the contesting respondent. 2. Learned Senior Counsel Sri.Dhyan Chinnappa seeks to raise a preliminary objection regarding maintainability of the commercial appeal. However, learned Senior counsel Sri. V.Srinivasan Raghavan appearing for the appellants would draw the attention of this Court to order dated 18.02.2025 passed in WP.No.4758/2025 between the same parties. It is pointed out that when similar preliminary objections were raised regarding maintainability of the writ petition, the learned single Judge upheld such contention while making it clear that the writ petition is not maintainable in view of Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and it was held that an appeal would lie and not a writ petition. That being the position, it is contended that learned senior counsel cannot raise an objection in this commercial - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:18165-DB COMAP No. 268 of 2025 appeal having regard to the position being made clear at the hands of the learned Single Judge of this Court. 3. Nevertheless, having regard to the fact that the appellants who are the respondents before the Trial Court are aggrieved of the impugned order dated 02.05.2025 passed on I.A No.VI, whereby the order of status-quo passed on 14.02.2025 was extended from that day till the next date of hearing and before this Court it is being contended that at the hands of the learned Senior counsel appearing for the appellants that the order of status-quo would go beyond the prayers made by the respondent before the Trial Court, we are of the considered opinion that it is for the appellants to seek such a clarification at the hands of the Trial Court or seek modification. 4. Learned Senior counsel would request that liberty may be granted to the appellants to move the Vacation Bench of the Commercial Court in view of the urgency. Accordingly, the Commercial Appeal stands disposed of, granting liberty to the appellants to move the - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:18165-DB COMAP No. 268 of 2025 Vacation Bench of the Commercial Court, either to seek clarification of the orders passed by the Commercial Court or seek appropriate modification. This Court has said nothing on the merits of the matter. 4. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE KBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3