- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29175-DB RFA No. 1597 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1597 OF 2024 (MON) BETWEEN: M/S. VASAN HEALTH CARE PRIVATE LIMITED 120 A BAZAAR ROAD, SAIDAPET, CHENNAI-600 015, REPRESENTED BY ADARSH HEGDE. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. V AKSHAY KUMAR JAIN, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. M.S. SUMUKHA PHARMACEUTICALS NO. 1429, 17TH B MAIN, BEHIND WOODYS HOSTEL, J. P. NAGAR, 2ND PHASE, BENGALURU-560 078. 2. DR. RAJASHEKAR AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, PROPRIETOR OF M/S. VARSIDDI PHARMA, Digitally signed by PAVITHRA N Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29175-DB RFA No. 1597 of 2024 EARLIER KNOWN AS M/S. SAI PHARMA NO. 633, 100 FEET RING ROAD, J. P. NAGAR, BENGALURU-560 078. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M B CHANDRACHOODA, ADV. FOR R1; SRI. VIVEK HOLLA, ADV. FOR R2) THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 R/W ORDER 41 RULE 1 OF CPC, 1908, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 27.03.2024 PASSED IN OS.NO.5690/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE XXXIII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU, PARTLY DECREEING THE SUIT FOR RECOVERY OF MONEY. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29175-DB RFA No. 1597 of 2024 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN) This appeal is filed against the Judgment and Decree dated 27.03.2024 passed by the XXXIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge at Bengaluru City (CCH-33) ('trial Court' for short) in O.S.No.5690/2016, wherein the trial Court partly decreed the suit as against defendant No.2 directing it to pay a sum of Rs.13,02,740/- with current and future interest at 9% p.a. from the date of suit till the date of realization and the suit against defendant No.1 was dismissed. 2. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant as well as the learned counsel appearing for the respondents. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant that the appellant, against whom a decree for recovery of money has been passed, was undergoing Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process under the provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ('IBC'), which was initiated on 21.04.2017. It is further submitted that the Judgment and Decree is one passed by the trial Court on - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29175-DB RFA No. 1597 of 2024 27.03.2024, despite the fact that the Resolution Plan had already been approved on 03.02.2023. 4. It is submitted that, in view of the clear embargo as per Section 14(1)(a) of the IBC, the proceedings could not have been continued and the Judgment and Decree could not have been passed as against the appellant - Company on 27.03.2024. 5. Though, the learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1/plaintiff submits that the fact of the appellant/defendant No.2 under-going insolvency proceedings was not brought to the notice of the trial Court, the Order Sheets produced by the learned counsel for the appellant clearly indicate that the pendency of the insolvency proceedings had been brought to the notice of the trial Court. 6. In the above circumstances, we are of the opinion that the Judgment and Decree dated 27.03.2024 is non-est in law. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29175-DB RFA No. 1597 of 2024 7. In the result:- 1) The appeal is allowed. 2) The judgment and decree dated 27.03.2024 passed by the XXXIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge at Bengaluru City in O.S.No.5690/2016, is set aside as against the appellant. All pending interlocutory applications shall stand disposed of. Sd/- (ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE Sd/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE RAK List No.: 3 Sl No.: 2