Exploring Infinities Edtech Private Limited v. Mr. Suraj Ravichandra Naik

( ( ( IN(THE(HIGH(COURT(OF(KARNATAKA(AT(BENGALURU( RD DATED(THIS(THE(3 (DAY(OF(AUGUST,(2026(

BEFORE(

THE(HON'BLE(SMT.(JUSTICE(LALITHA(KANNEGANTI(

WRIT(PETITION(NO.(22820(OF(2026((GM-CPC)(

BETWEEN:((

( , EXPLORING,INFINITIES,, EDTECH,PRIVATE,LIMITED,

A,COMPANY,INCORPORATED,, UNDER,LAWS,THE,OF,COMPANIES,, ACT,,2013,IN,INDIA,,

HAVING,ITS,CORPORATE,OFFICE,, AT,BHANZU,,NO.483,,, SRINIVASA,ARCADE,,17TH,CROSS,,,

TH24 ,MAIN,ROAD,,HSR,LAYOUT,,, BENGALURU,,, KARNATAKA,-560,102,,

THROUGH,ITS,AUTHORIZED,SIGNATORY,, MR.,SRI,SAI,SUBRAHMANYA,SARMA,VELLALA, …PETITIONER,

Digitally (BY,SRI.ARUN,KUMAR,K.,,SENIOR,COUNSEL,FOR, signedtiby SUVARNA0T ,,,,,,SMT.RASHMI,DESHPANDE,,ADVOCATE), Location: , HIGH COURT0OF AND:( KARNATAKA (

1., MR.,SURAJ,RAVICHANDRA,NAIK, A-1,,303,,DHAWAL,HILLS,SOCIETY,,, GAWAND,BAUG,COMPLEX,,, POKHRAN,ROAD,NO.,2,,, NEAR,UPVAN,LAKE,THANE,, WEST,MAHARASHTRA-,400,610, ,

2., MR.,SAHAJ,PURI, THHOUSE,NO.,27,,20 ,MAIN,ROAD,,, NEAR,MBR,STARRY,APARTMENTS,,, ROYAL,RESIDENCY,LAYOUT,,, ( ( ( HULIMAVU,,, BENGALURU,-560,076,, KARNATAKA, ,

3., MR.,SAI,GOVINDU,BHARATH, NDNO.,301,,2 ,FLOOR,,, SMR,VINAY,ESTATE,,NEXT,TO,CCD,,, HORVAUE,BRIDGE,,, BENGALURU-560,043,, KARNATAKA, ,

4., MR.,AVINASH,SINHA, SOULTREE,BY,MODERN,SPACES,, NIRVANA,FLAT,NO.C-102,,, NEAR,SOMPURA,GATE,,SARJAPUR,,, BENGALURU,, KARNATAKA,-562,125, ,

5., MR.,WALZEENA,LAVITA,D,SOUZA, 2-46,SILVESTER,VILLA,BOLLUR,,, KOIKUDE,POST,,DAKSHINA,KANNADA,,, KARNATAKA,-574,146, ,

6., MR.,SANSKAR,JAIN, AHIRON,KA,MOHALLA,,, PURANI,TONK,,TONK,,, RAJASTHAN,-304,001, ,

7., MR.,VAMSI,KRISHNA,BELLAMKONDA, H.,NO.,1-19-3,,NEAR,RAMAMANDIRAM,, VYKUNTAPURAM,,CHIRALA,,, ANDHRA,PRADESH-523,155, ,

8., MS.,SILITA,SIMANTIKA, ROW,HOUSE,NO.,44,,GOLDENWOODS,, KASAVANAHALLI,NEAR,PLAY,AREA,,, OFF.,SARAJPUR,ROAD,,, BENGALURU,-560,035, ,

9., MR.,MEVIN,MATHEW,PAULOSE, ( ( ( D-713,,ORCHID,CHS,LTD.,, CHAMBUR,,GOVANDI,(EAST),,, MUMBAI-,400,088,,, MAHARASHTRA, ,

10., BRIGHT,CHAMPS,TECH,, PRIVATE,LIMITED, A,COMPANY,INCORPORATED,UNDER,, THE,COMPANIES,ACT,,2013,, CORPORATE,OFFICE,AT,,, ST1 ,FLOOR,,36/6,,HUSTLEHUB,,, SOMASUNDARAPALYA,MAIN,ROAD,,, PWD,QUARTERS,,, SECTOR,2,,HSR,LAYOUT,,, BENGALURU-560,102, …RESPONDENTS, , , THIS, WRIT, PETITION, IS, FILED, UNDER, ARTICLES, 226, AND, 227, OF, THE, CONSTITUTION, OF, INDIA,, PRAYING, TO,, QUASH,THE,IMPUGNED,ORDER,DATED,16.07.2026,PASSED,BY, THE,LD.,TRIAL,COURT,,IN,SO,FAR,AS,IT,DECLINES,TO,ALLOW, I.A., NO., 2, IN, COM., O.S., NO., 1068/2026, EX-PARTE, VIDE, ANNEXURE-A.,, , THIS,PETITION,,COMING,ON,FOR,FINAL,HEARING,,THIS, DAY,,ORDER,WAS,MADE,THEREIN,AS,UNDER:, CORAM:, HON'BLE,SMT.,JUSTICE,LALITHA,KANNEGANTI, ,

ORAL ORDER

Aggrieved by the order dated 16.07.2026 in I.A.No.2 in Com.O.S.No.1068/2026 passed by the LXXXVIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, wherein the trial Court failed to consider I.A.No.2 and issued suit summons to the defendants, the petitioner/plaintiff is before this Court.

¶2Learned Senior counsel representing the counsel for the petitioner submits that, having considered the prima facie case, the balance of convenience, and irreparable loss, the pre-institution mediation process has been exempted, and I.A.No.3 has been allowed, restraining the defendants from infringing the plaintiff's copyright materials as defined in paragraph No.17(a) of the plaint and from unlawfully misappropriating the plaintiff's proprietary material and confidential information, including its trade secrets and technical know-how, until the next date of hearing, and suit summons have been issued. Learned Senior counsel submits that unless I.A.No.2 is ordered by the trial Court, it would cause lot of hardship to the petitioner, the information will be lost, and it will be difficult for the plaintiff to prove his case. In these circumstances, the

Court ought to have considered I.A.No.2 and ought to have appointed a commissioner. It is submitted that, looking at the urgency and requirements, this Court may appoint the commissioner. It is submitted that the trial Court ought to have passed the order on the merits of the matter when I.A.No.2 was filed, instead of issuing suit summons.

¶3Having heard the learned Senior counsel for the petitioner, perused the entire material on record. The petitioner has filed I.A.Nos. 1, 2 and 3. The trial Court allowed I.A.No.3, exempting the pre-institution mediation, and permitted the plaintiff to institute the suit. This Court has perused the affidavit filed in support of the application and the requirement put forth by the plaintiff as to why an ad-interim order is required in the facts and circumstances of the case, by passing an order on I.A.No.2. The trial Court, having allowed I.A.No.3, ought to have considered I.A.No.2 and based on the facts and circumstances, ought to have passed a reasoned order without issuing suit summons. At the same time, this Court is not inclined to appoint a commissioner, as that has to be done by the trial Court after considering the facts of the case and the

requirement of passing such an order on I.A.No.2. In these circumstances, this Court is passing the following order: ORDER i. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the trial Court to consider I.A.No.2 in accordance with law and pass an order on the merits of the matter within two days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, notwithstanding the fact that the suit summons are not served on the respondents. ii. All I.As. in this petition shall stand closed.

SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE

MEG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 30