- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9475 WP No. 26129 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.26129 OF 2024 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: M/S INNOVENT SPACES PRIVATE LIMITED A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER COMPANIES ACT 2013 OFFICE AT CAREENET CAMPUS PLOT NO. 53 KARIYAMMA AGRAHARA ROAD DEVARABISANAHALLI, OUTER RING ROAD BENGALURU 560 103. REPRESENTED BY MR. PRADEEP KUMAR GUPTA SENIOR MANAGER FINANCE AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. THEJAS W.K., ADVOCATE FOR SMT. ARCHANA K.M, ADVOCATE) AND: M/S AFFLE X PVT LTD A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER COMPANIES ACT, 1956 P 601-612, 6TH FLOOR TOWER C JMD MEGAPOLIS, SOHNA ROAD SECTOR 48, GURUGRAM 122 018 ALSO AT VAISHNAVI TECH PARK GROUND FLOOR, SARJAPUR MAIN RD, BELLANDUR, BENGALURU - 560 103 REP.BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. DHANUSH M., ADVOCATE) THIS W.P IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DTD 9.09.2024 PASSED ON IA NO.14 TO 16 IN COM OS NO.292/2023 BY THE LXXXIV ADDL CITY CIVIL AND SESSION JUDGE (CCH-85) BENGALURU KARNATAKA AND PASS AN ORDER ALLOWING IA NO.14 TO 16 VIDE ANNX-A ALLOWING Digitally signed by CHANDANA B M Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9475 WP No. 26129 of 2024 THE PETITIONER TO PRODUCE DOCUMENT AND ALLOWING THE PETITIONER TO LEAD FURTHER EVIDENCE. 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 plaintiff in Com.O.S.No.292/2023 is directed against the impugned order dated 09.09.2024 passed on I.A.Nos.14 to 16, whereby the said applications filed by the petitioner – plaintiff to recall PW-1 and to produce additional evidence by recalling PW-1 and by re-opening the case, were dismissed by the Commercial Court. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent and perused the material on record. 3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the aforesaid commercial suit filed by the petitioner – plaintiff against the respondent – defendant for recovery in a sum of Rs.65,60,826/- the petitioner adduced oral and documentary evidence and after cross-examining PW-1, the petitioner filed the instant applications seeking permission to recall PW-1 and to produce additional evidence by recalling PW-1 and to re-open the case. The said - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9475 WP No. 26129 of 2024 applications having been opposed by the respondent-defendant, the Commercial Court proceeded to pass the impugned order rejecting the applications on the ground that the Affidavits filed in support of the said applications, did not make out valid or sufficient cause for delayed production of documents. In my considered opinion, the reasoning of the Commercial Court and the findings recorded by it are contrary to the material on record, in as much as, the documents now sought to be produced are relevant, essential and material for the purpose of adjudication of the issues in controversy between the parties. In the event, since the respondent-defendant would be entitled to cross-examine PW-1 with reference to the additional evidence, it cannot be said that any prejudice would be caused to the respondent-defendant if PW-1 is permitted to be recalled for further evidence and by producing the additional documents. 4. Under these circumstances, I am of the view that the impugned order passed by the Commercial Court dismissing the applications has occasioned failure of justice warranting interference by this Court in the present petition. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9475 WP No. 26129 of 2024 5. In the result, I pass the following:- ORDER (i) The petition is hereby allowed. (ii) The impugned order dated 09.09.2024 passed on I.A.Nos.14 to 16 in Com.O.S.No.292/2023 by the Commercial Court is hereby set aside. (iii) Petitioner-plaintiff is permitted to adduce further evidence of PW-1 without seeking unnecessary adjournments in the matter. (iv) Liberty is reserved in favour of the respondent-defendant to cross-examine PW-1 on all aspects of the matter including additional evidence. (v) The Commercial Court is direct to permit respondent – defendant to adduce oral evidence after completion of cross-examination of PW-1 and proceed further in the matter. (vi) It is needless to state that upon the respondent – defendant adducing oral and documentary evidence, the petitioner would be entitled to cross-examine the respondent-defendant and its witnesses. Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE SV List No.: 3 Sl No.: 2