- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:12913 WP No. 34493 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 34493 OF 2024 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SRI MOHAMMED SIDDIQ S/O. LATE BASHA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS R/AT NO. 3, T.N.O. 1ST STREET ARUNACHAL MUDALIAR ROAD HAVING SHOP AT SHOP NO. 9 KRUPASHREE, OLD NO. 14 QUADRANT ROAD, NEW NO. 23 THYAGI DORAISWAMY ROAD PID NO. 79-23-23 WARD NO. 79, SHIVAJINAGAR BANGALORE-560 051. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAJESHWARI M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. DR GIRISH K NASHI S/O. LATE K. G. NASHI AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS 2. SMT. R. SHARMILA W/O. GIRISH K. NASHI AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS 3. SRI. AMARESH G. NASHI S/O. GIRISH K. NASHI AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS Digitally signed by HEMALATHA A Location: HIGH COURTOF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:12913 WP No. 34493 of 2024 4. SRI. ADESH G. NASHI S/O. GIRISH K. NASHI AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS ALL ARE RESIDING AT NO. 76 N.N. FARM ROAD, SANJAYNAGAR BANGALORE-560 094. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.K N MAHABALESHWARA RAO., ADVOCATE FOR C/R1 TO C/R4) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED: 10.12.2024 PASSED BY THE LXXXIII COMMERCIAL COURT (CCH-84) ON I.A.NO.5 IN COM O.S.NO. 239/2024 VIDE ANNEXURE-D AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD ORAL ORDER This writ petition is filed by the defendant under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the order dated 10.12.2024 passed on IA No.5 in Com.O.S.No.239/2004 by the LXXXIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Commercial Court, Bengaluru, whereby the application filed by the defendant for permission to file the written statement has been rejected. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:12913 WP No. 34493 of 2024 2. The plaintiff filed a suit for eviction. As per the original records of the trial court, notice issued to the respondent/petitioner to his address, i.e., residential address is not served and the same has been returned. In respect of the notice sent through post to the second address, i.e., commercial premises, the order sheet shows that it has been served and also order sheet shows that Chidambara, learned counsel filed vakalath on behalf of the defendant. As per the records the defendant was served on 21.02.2024. Even after 120 days, written statement has not been filed. In view of the provisions of Commercial Courts Act, the right to file a written statement has been forfeited. Thereafter, the defendant filed IA No.5 seeking permission to file the written statement. The specific averment made in the application is that he has not executed any power to appear in this case and he was not aware of the pendency of the suit since no notice has been served. Even today, he filed an affidavit before this Court denying the acknowledgment produced in the court to show that notice has been served - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:12913 WP No. 34493 of 2024 to respondent on his second address and stated that it is not the signature of the petitioner/defendant. In view of the above, since the trial court rejected the application on the ground that 120 days has expired, the application for permitting to file written statement may be allowed. 3. In view of the above, the following order is passed: (i) The writ petition is allowed. (ii) The order dated 10.12.2024 passed on IA No.5 in Com.O.S.No.239/2024 by the LXXXIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Commercial Court, Bengaluru is set aside. (iii) The trial court is directed to take on record the written statement filed along with the application. (iv) This permission is subject to the petitioner/defendant depositing Rs. 2,00,000/- (rupees two lakhs) only - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:12913 WP No. 34493 of 2024 before the trial court, within four weeks from today. (v) If the plaintiff files an application for payment of arrears of rent, the trial court, after hearing the parties, if it comes to the conclusion that the defendant has any arrears of rent, that amount may be released in favour of the plaintiff. (vi) All the contentions of the parties are left open. (vii) Office is directed to return the original file to the trial court, forthwith. (viii) In view of disposal of the petition, all pending applications stand disposed of. Sd/- (H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE CM LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 50