Smt. Porkodi v. M/S. Royaloak Infrastructure Llp

NC:(2026:KHC:12871( WP(No.(6677(of(2026( ( , ,,HC-KAR( ( ( IN(THE(HIGH(COURT(OF(KARNATAKA(AT(BENGALURU(

NDDATED(THIS(THE(2 (DAY(OF(MARCH,(2026(

BEFORE( THE(HON'BLE(MR.(JUSTICE(H.T.(NARENDRA(PRASAD( WRIT(PETITION(NO.(6677(OF(2026((GM-CPC)( BETWEEN:(( ( SMT.,PORKODI, AGED,ABOUT,45,YEARS,, W/O,MR.,SELVADURAI, R/,AT,NO.2,,BANGALORE,HIGHWAY,ROAD, VARADARAJASPURAM, TIRUVALLUR,,NAZARPETTAI, TAMIL,NADU,-,600,123, …PETITIONER, (BY,SRI.,S,B,TOTAD.,,ADVOCATE),

AND:( (

M/S.,ROYALOAK,INFRASTRUCTURE,LLP, (COMPANY,ACT), THOFFICE,AT,4 ,FLOOR,,NO.5,

Digitallytisigned RAJ,SQUARE,,VIJAYA,BANK,COLONY, by BANASWADI,,OUTER,RING,ROAD, DHANALAKSHMI BANGALORE,-,560043,MURTHY

REP.,BY,ITS,PARTNER,Location:0HIGH COURTOF MR.,S.,MATHAN, KARNATAKA …RESPONDENT, (BY,SRI.VIJYAKUMAR,PRAKASH,,ADVOCATE,FOR, SRI,K,R,BHARADWAJ,,ADVOCATE,FOR,RESPONDENT), , THIS, WRIT, PETITION, IS, FILED, UNDER, ARTICLES, 226, AND,227,OF,THE,CONSTITUTION,OF,INDIA,PRAYING,TO,ISSUE, A, WRIT, OF, CERTIORARI, OR, ANY, OTHER, SUITABLE, WRIT, OR, DIRECTION, AS, THE, CASE, MAY, BE, AND, QUASH, THE, ORDER, DATED,19.02.2026,PASSED,BY,THE,LXXXII,ADDITIONAL,CITY, CIVIL,AND,SESSIONS,JUDGE,BANGALORE,(CCH-83),IN,COM,O, S, NO, 1513/2024, ON, I.A.NO.5, FOR, PRODUCTION, OF, DOCUMENTS,PRODUCED,AT,ANNEXURE-E,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

¶1This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India by the petitioner-defendant challenging the order dated 19.02.2026 passed by the LXXXII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru in Com.O.S.No.1513/2024, whereby I.A.No.5 filed by the petitioner-defendant under Order XI Rule 1(10) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 read with Section 151 of the CPC for production of additional documents has been rejected.

¶2Learned counsel appearing for petitioner– defendant submitted that the petitioner had handed over all the documents, which are very necessary to establish her case, to the previous advocate, but the same were not produced along with the written statement. Therefore, she has filed the said application along with the documents at the stage of her evidence to substantiate her defense.

Since all these documents are necessary to establish her case, she seeks permission to produce the same.

¶3Learned counsel for respondent–plaintiff submitted that the cause shown for production of the documents was not satisfactory to the Trial Court and that she has filed the said application solely to drag the matter. Hence, he sought dismissal of the application.

¶4Be that as it may, since the documents were handed over to the earlier advocate and were not produced along with the written statement, and as they are relevant for the defendant to defend her case, in the interest of justice, the order dated 19.02.2026 passed by the LXXXII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, in Com.O.S.No.1513/2024 is liable to be set aside.

¶5Hence, following order: ORDER a) I.A. No.5 filed under Order XI Rule 1(10) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 read with Section 151

of the CPC is allowed, subject to the condition that petitioner–defendant shall produce documents on the next date of hearing, i.e.,

06.03.2026, without fail, subject to payment of cost of Rs.15,000/- payable to the respondent-plaintiff. b) Upon payment of cost, the petitioner–defendant is permitted to produce documents on

06.03.2026. c) The trial Court is directed to dispose of the suit as expeditiously as possible.

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

HA LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 12