- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13962 WP No. 104937 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO. 104937 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: THE SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER, PANCHAYAT RAJ ENGINEERING DIVISION, BELGAUM CIRCLE, BELGAUM-590 001. … PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHIVRAJ S. BALLOLI, ADVOCATE) AND: M/S VALCHAND K. SHAH, REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FIRM, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT: H.NO.689, “SANJAY NIVAS”, ASHOK NAGAR, NIPPANI, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, SHRI JAYANT VALCHAND SHAH, AGE. 52 YEARS, OCC. CONTRACTOR, H.NO.689, “SANJAY NIVAS”, ASHOK NAGAR, NIPPANI-591 237. … RESPONDENT (BY SRI. SUDARSHAN PATIL, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER ON IA NO.23 DATED 29/04/2025 PASSED BY LEARNED PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BELAGAVI IN COM O.S. NO.3/2023 VIDE ANNEXURE A. CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.10.18 07:57:09 +0100 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13962 WP No. 104937 of 2025 THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that application filed by the petitioner/defendant for production of 72 documents is rejected by the Trial Court. He would submit that those documents are necessary for adjudication of the case, as such, he would urge that the petition is to be allowed and impugned has to be set aside. 2. Learned counsel for the respondent/plaintiff would urge that out of 72 documents sought to be produced, some are already produced or marked either by confronting the same to the plaintiff or in the evidence of the defendant and some of other documents sought to be produced are xerox copies. The list of such documents is produced along with the memo dated 15.10.2025. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent would submit that there is no need to produce the documents already marked and as far as the documents which are said to be the xerox - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13962 WP No. 104937 of 2025 copies, learned counsel for the respondent would urge if the petitioner produces either the original or the certified copy, production of those documents may be allowed without prejudice to the contention of the plaintiff/respondent and subject to admissibility and proof of those documents. 4. Considering the submission made, this Court is of the view that impugned has to be set aside partially. 5. Except the documents which are already marked (as per the memo referred to above), the remaining documents subject to production of either original or certified copies are allowed to be produced. Merely because this Court has permitted production of the document, it should not be construed as having held that the documents are relevant or admissible. Admissibility and relevancy are the questions to be decided by the Trial Court during the course of the trial/final order. 6. With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of. 7. The impugned order is modified to that extent. Since it is also brought to the notice of this Court, earlier this Court has - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13962 WP No. 104937 of 2025 directed day-to-day trial to complete trial within 6 months, it has directed the Commercial Court to complete the trial within 6 months. 8. Since it is a commercial dispute, needless to say that both parties should cooperate for early disposal and case shall be decided within 6 months from today. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE CLK CT:BCK LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 90