Sri. Murrali. M. Baaladev v. M/S. Mohan Silks and Sarees

NC:(2026:KHC:22237( WP(No.(11021(of(2026( ( , ,,HC-KAR( ( ( IN(THE(HIGH(COURT(OF(KARNATAKA(AT(BENGALURU(

RDDATED(THIS(THE(23 (DAY(OF(APRIL,(2026(

BEFORE( THE(HON'BLE(MR.(JUSTICE(H.T.(NARENDRA(PRASAD( WRIT(PETITION(NO.(11021(OF(2026((GM-CPC)( BETWEEN:(( SRI.,MURRALI.,M.,BAALADEV, S/O,OF,LATE,M.S.,BAALADEV, AGED,ABOUT,47,YEARS, M/S.,KAANCHI,CO.,SRINIDHI,SILK, NO.2,,1ST,FLOOR,,B.V.K.,IYENGAR,ROAD, CHICKPET,CIRCLE,,BENGALURU,560053, …PETITIONER,

(BY,SRI.,SRIDHARA,N.,,ADVOCATE),

AND:(

1., M/S.,MOHAN,SILKS,AND,SAREES,

REP.,BY,ITS,PARTNERS, ,

2., SRI.,S.G.,VINAYAKA,

S/O.,LATE.,S.G.,GOPALAKRISHNASA, AGED,ABOUT,56,YEARS,Digitallytisignedtiby DHANALAKSHMI NO.8/1,,MOHIDEEN,SAB,LANE, MURTHY J.M.,ROAD,CROSS,,NARAYANASHETTYPET, Location:0HIGH BENGALURU-560002., COURTOF ,KARNATAKA

3., SMT.,S.G.,SHARADA, W/O.,LATE.,S.G.,GOPALAKRISHNASA, AGED,MAJOR, NO.8/1,,MOHIDEEN,SAB,LANE, J.M.,ROAD,CROSS,,NARAYANASHETTYPET, BENGALURU-560002., …RESPONDENTS, (BY,SRI.H,J,SANGHVI.,,ADVOCATE,FOR,C/R1), , THIS,WRIT,PETITION,IS,FILED,UNDER,ARTICLE,227,OF, THE, PRAYING,TO, SET, ASIDE,THE, ORDER,DATED, 09.03.2026,

(ANNEXURE-A) PASSED IN COM. O.S. NO.1116/2023 BY THE LXXXII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, COMMERCIAL COURT AT BENGALURU, DISMISSING THE APPLICATION (I.A. NO. 12), FILED UNDER ORDER XI RULE 5(1) OF THE COMMERCIAL COURTS ACT, 2015 READ WITH SECTION 151 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908, FILED BY THE PETITIONER AND ETC.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

ORAL ORDER

¶1In this writ petition, the petitioner-defendant has called in question the order dated 09.03.2026 passed by the LXXXII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Commercial Court, Bengaluru (for short 'Commercial Court') on I.A.No.12 filed under Order XI Rule 5(1) of Commercial Courts Act, 2015, in Com.O.S.No.1116/2023, whereby the said application has been dismissed.

¶2For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Commercial Court in Original Suit.

¶3The plaintiff filed a suit in Com.O.S.No.1116/2023 before the Commercial Court seeking for recovery of money. Upon appearance, the defendant filed I.A.No.12 under Order XI Rule 5(1) of Commercial Courts Act, 2015 seeking permission to produce documents i.e., (a) Bank Statements for the period commencing from 01.04.2011 to 16.10.2010 of the defendant (b) Ledger Statements indicating the payments made by the defendant to the plaintiff. The Commercial Court, by order dated

09.03.2026 dismissed the said application. Aggrieved by the said impugned order passed by the Trial Court, the present writ petition has been filed.

¶4The application filed by the defendant came to be dismissed particularly on the ground that in paragraph-5 of the Statement of Truth, the defendant has stated that he has disclosed all the documents in his possession, however, he has not disclosed about the above said documents.

¶5Insofar as production of bank statements is concerned, it is an official document. If the same is permitted to be produced, it will not cause any prejudice to the plaintiff. Insofar as production of ledger statements is concerned, there is no pleading in the written statement regarding the ledger statement. Therefore, the Commercial Court is justified in dismissing the prayer to the extent of production of the ledger statement.

¶6In view of the above, the following order is passed: ORDER a) The writ petition is allowed-in-part. b) The impugned order dated 09.03.2026 passed by the LXXXII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Commercial Court, Bengaluru on I.A.No.12 in Com.O.S.No.1116/2023, is hereby set aside only to the extent of production of bank statement; and in respect of production of

ledger statement, the impugned order is confirmed. c) I.A.No.12 filed by the defendant is allowed in part. d) The defendant is permitted to produce the bank statements for the period commencing from

01.04.2011 to 16.10.2020. e) The Commercial Court is directed to dispose of the suit in accordance with law and as expeditiously as possible, not later than five months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

Sd/- (H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE

DM LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 18