- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32251-DB COM.APLN No. 1 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI COMMERCIAL APPLICATION NO. 1 OF 2025 BETWEEN: MS. RADHIKA NANDIVADA @ RADHIKA MURTHY, W/O DR. P.S. MURTHY, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/AT J 04, J BLOCK, GROUND FLOOR, DIAMOND DISTRICT APARTMENTS, KODIHALLI, OLD AIRPORT ROAD, BANGALORE-560 008. …APPLICANT (BY SRI NARENDRA DEV H N, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MR. GEORGE THANGIAH, S/O. LATE MR. MARK THANGIAH, AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS, R/AT NO.6, COMMISSARIAT ROAD, BANGALORE-560 025. SINCE DEAD, REP. BY HIS LRS. 1(a) MRS. CHITRA POORNIMA, W/O. LATE MR. GEORGE THANGIAH, AGED MAJOR, R/AT NO.6, COMMISSARIAT ROAD, BANGALORE-560 025. 1(b) MR. SHEKHAR THANGIAH, S/O LATE MR. GEORGE THANGIAH, AGED MAJOR, Digitally signed by NANDINI R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32251-DB COM.APLN No. 1 of 2025 R/AT NO.6, COMMISSARIAT ROAD, BANGALORE-560 025. 1(c) MS. RACHEL CHITRA THANGIAH, D/O. LATE MR. GEORGE THANGIAH, AGED MAJOR, R/AT NO.5, COMMISSARIAT ROAD, BANGALORE-560 025. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI GEORGE JOSEPH, ADVOCATE FOR R-1 (a TO c)) THIS COMMERCIAL APPLICATION IS FILED UNDER SEC.15(5) OF THE COMMERCIAL COURTS ACT, 2015, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 10.02.2025 PASSED BY THE LD. XIV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU (CH-28) (ANNEXURE - A) ON THE MEMO DATED 4.12.2024 FILED BY THE APPLICANT IN OS NO.3972/2012 AND, CONSEQUENTLY, WITHDRAW THE SAID SUIT FROM THE FILES OF THE LD. XIV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU AND TRANSFER THE SAME TO THE LD. COMMERCIAL COURT, BENGALURU, FOR ITS TRIAL AND DISPOSAL. THIS APPLICATION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE) 1. The applicant has filed the present application under Section 15(5) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 [the CC Act] impugning an order dated 10.02.2025 passed in O.S No.3972/2012 by the XIV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru [learned Trial - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32251-DB COM.APLN No. 1 of 2025 Court] rejecting the application (memo) filed by the applicant for transferring the case to the jurisdictional Commercial Court. 2. It is the applicant’s case that the suit instituted by the applicant (OS.No.3972/2012) involves a commercial dispute and therefore, it is required to be transferred to the learned Commercial Court in terms of Section 15 of the CC Act. 3. The applicant had filed aforesaid suit claiming a sum of ₹5,00,00,000/- along with interest at the rate of 24% per annum on account of services rendered. According to the applicant, he had entered into an oral agreement with the respondent in October 2006, whereby, the applicant was appointed as a Real Estate Agent. She was authorized to find developers for entering into Joint Development transactions. The applicant claims that in consideration for her services, she was entitled to the payment of 2% commission on the value of the respondents' share in the Joint Development transactions. According to the applicant, the first Joint Development transaction facilitated by her was entered into between the respondents and Nitesh Indiranagar Retail Private Limited [NIRPL] on 19.10.2007. The applicant had also raised invoice of ₹5,51,50,000/- inclusive of Service Tax at the rate of - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32251-DB COM.APLN No. 1 of 2025 10.3% for the services rendered. The respondents refused to make payment and therefore the applicant instituted the aforementioned suit in OS.No.3972/2012 before learned trial Court. 4. It is stated that initially the learned City Civil Court had transferred the suit to the learned Commercial Court in August 2020. However, by an order dated 03.04.2021, the learned Commercial Court has transferred it back to the learned Civil Court on the ground that the disputes involved in the suit are not commercial disputes and do not fall within the scope of commercial disputes under Section 2(1)(c)(xiii) of the CC Act. The said clause is set out as below: " (xiiii) subscription and investment agreements pertaining to the services industry including outsourcing services and financial services" 5. According to the applicant, the dispute falls within the scope of Section 2(1)(c)(xviii) of the CC Act, which reads as under: "(xviii) agreements for sale of goods or provision of services" 6. Accordingly, the applicant had moved a memo (application), which was dismissed by the impugned order. The learned counsel - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32251-DB COM.APLN No. 1 of 2025 for the respondents does not counter the contention that the disputes involved in the suit fall within the scope of Section 2(1)(c)(xviii) of the CC Act. It is also apparent from the nature of the dispute as noted above that the same would fall within the definition of a Commercial Dispute under Section 2(1)(c)(xviii) of the CC Act. 7. In the aforesaid view, we allow the present application and direct that the suit (OS.No.3972/2012) be transferred from the learned XIV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru to the concerned Commercial Court. It is also clarified that the learned Commercial Court shall continue the proceedings in the same stage as currently before the learned Civil Court. 8. The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms. Sd/- (VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- (C M JOSHI) JUDGE NR/- List No.: 1 Sl No.: 48