Item- A- 851. sg 13-08-2026 Ct. 6 CO 659 of 2026 Sanjib Narayan Lahiri & Ors. Versus Navyug Residency Pvt. Ltd. [ Mr. Avijit Bardhan Mr. Gourab Moondal …for the petitioner This matter was mentioned by the learned advocate for the petitioner citing urgency. Considering the urgency pleaded, this matter has been upgraded to be taken up today at 2 P.M. This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is at the instance of the plaintiff and is directed against orders dated May 5, 2025 and December 16, 2025 both passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), 1st Court, Alipore, South 24 Parganas in Title Suit No. 85 of 2022. By the order dated May 5, 2025, the application of the petitioner for transfer of the instant suit under Section 15 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 stood rejected. The petitioner thereafter filed an application for recalling of the said order which stood dismissed by the subsequent order dated 16th December, 2025. Mr. Bardhan, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that through inadvertence, the suit was filed before the Ordinary Civil Court instead of the Commercial Court. He further submits that the instant suit was not properly valued and the valuation of the instant suit is much above the threshold limit fixed for a commercial dispute to be decided by a Commercial Court. 2 After going through the provisions of Section 15 of the of the Commercial Courts Act, this Court is of the considered view that the said provision relating to transfer of the suit to a Commercial Court cannot be applied in the case of instant nature and the learned Trial Judge was right in rejecting the application filed by the petitioner praying for transfer of the suit to the Commercial Court. At this stage, Mr. Bardhan, learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the learned Trial Judge ought to have considered the application for transfer as an application under Order VII Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure. After going through the reliefs claimed in the said application, this Court finds that the petitioner has not prayed for return of the plaint of the suit. This Court is not inclined to accept the submission of Mr. Bardhan that the application under Section 15 should be construed as an application under Order VII Rule 10 of the Code. In the light of the submission made by Mr. Bardhan, learned advocate for the petitioner that the suit was not properly valued, this Court feels that interest of justice would be sub-served if an opportunity is granted to the petitioner to file an appropriate application for return of the plaint of the instant suit. If such an application is filed, the same shall be taken up for hearing and decided by the learned Trial Judge as expeditiously as possible after affording an opportunity to the opposite party to file the written objection thereto. Needless to mention that if any application is filed 3 pursuant to the liberty granted by this Court, the same shall be decided without being swayed by the observation made in the impugned order. With the above observations and directions, this civil revisional application stands disposed of. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance of all requisite formalities. (Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.)