- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5637 WP No. 1807 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 1807 OF 2026 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: M/S DAVANAM JEWELLERS PVT LTD NO.8, COMMERCIAL STREET JUNCTION, KAMRAJ ROAD, CIVIL STATION, BENGALURU - 560042 REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTORS MR. D.V. ARAVIND AND D.V. RAVINDRANATH …PETITIONER (BY SRI. BHARGAV G., ADVOCATE) AND: M/S PSSV INCORPORATION PARTNERSHIP FIRM REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNERS 1. SMT. PUSHPA SHAILENDRA W/O LATE L SHAILENDRA AGED 59 YEARS 2. SMT. SONAL SHAILENDRA D/O LATE L SHAILENDRA AGED 35 YEARS 3. SRI VIKYATH. S. LATCHMAIAH S/O LATE L SHAILENDRA AGED 29 YEARS Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5637 WP No. 1807 of 2026 ALL RESIDING AT NO. 5, SATHYANARAYANA TEMPLE STREET, HALASURU, BENGALURU - 560 008 …RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 05.01.2026 VIDE ANNX-A PASSED BY THE LXXXVI ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, COMMERCIAL COURT BENGALURU (CCH-87) ON IA NO. 8 IN COM. OS NO. 487/2024. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR ORAL ORDER This petition by the defendant in Com.O.S.No.487 of 2024 is directed against the impugned order dated 05.01.2026, whereby, the application-I.A.No.8 filed by the petitioner/defendant under Order 11 Rule 5 read with Section 151 of CPC for permission to produce additional documents was disposed of by the Commercial Court by holding as under: "Plaintiff present. Both advocates are present. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5637 WP No. 1807 of 2026 Advocate for defendant filed a memo along with certified copy of the order passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru in W.P.No. 33892/2024. The Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka disposed of the writ petition with the following observations; i. This petition is disposed of. ii. Liberty is reserved to the defendant to putforth all his claim both by way of oral and documentary evidence. iii. Adduce any further evidence, if required urge all contentions with regard to the excess amount, if any paid. iv. The Commercial Court shall consider the same and pass suitable orders in accordance with law. v. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter. vi. Liberty is reserved to both the plaintiffs and the defendant to adduce further evidence, if required and proceed further in the matter. vii. The suit is of the year 2024, hence the Commercial Court shall dispose of the suit expeditiously. Heard both the sides on IA No.8 which is filed by the defendant U/o.11 Rule 5 r/w Sec. 151 of CPC seeking permission to produce a copy of Lease Deed dated 05.03.2021 and to mark the same through DW.1. The plaintiff filed the suit seeking a decree of eviction, arrears of rent uptill November 2023. He - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5637 WP No. 1807 of 2026 has also sought the damages from December 2023 until handing over of vacant possession. In the plaint the plaintiff pleaded that he has issued a legal notice dated 20.12.2023 U/Sec.106 of the Transfer of Property Act and terminated the tenancy. Post termination of tenancy the plaintiff seeking for damages. In order to ascertain the damages the defendant has sought to produce the Lease Deed dated 05.03.2021, the property of the Lease Deed dated 05.03.2021 is said to have situated very close to the suit property. In the present suit this Court may pass a judgment inter-alia declaring that the plaintiff is entitled for damages from December 2023 until handing over of vacant possession. If such a decree is passed in favour of the plaintiff, the plaintiff may initiate final decree proceedings requesting the Court to ascertain the actual damages. In FDP proceedings the parties are at liberty to adduce their respective evidences. Therefore, production of Lease Deed dated 05.03.2021, at this stage is unwarranted. The defendant is at liberty to produce the Lease Deed dated 05.03.2021 in the FDP proceedings. By this observations IA No.8 filed U/0.11 Rule 5 of CPC is disposed of. Since the evidence is already over, the matter is posted to arguments on merits by 14.01.2026". 2. Upon re-consideration, re-appreciation and re-evaluation of the entire material on record, I am of the considered opinion that the impugned order passed by the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5637 WP No. 1807 of 2026 Commercial Court cannot be said to suffer from any illegality or infirmity nor can the same be said to have occasioned failure of justice warranting interference by this Court in the exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India as held in the cases of (i) Radhey Shyam & others Vs. Chhabi Nath & others (2015) 5 SCC 423 (ii) K.P.Natarajan & others Vs. Muthalammal & others AIR 2021 SC 3443 (iii) Mohammed Ali Vs. Jaya (2022) 10 SCC 477. Accordingly, I do not find any merit in the petition and the same is hereby disposed of without interfering with the impugned order. It is however, made clear that all rival contentions between the parties on all aspects of the matter including Prayer No.(c) are kept open to be decided by the Trial Court, in accordance with law and no opinion is expressed on the merits/de-merits of the rival contentions. Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE DH, List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10