Karnataka High Court
Quantum Investment Partners Llc vs M/S Durga Shree Heights Pvt Ltd on 11 February, 2026
Author: S.R.Krishna Kumar
Bench: S.R.Krishna Kumar
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:8513
WP No. 24078 of 2025
C/W WP No. 24085 of 2025
WP No. 31184 of 2025
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
WRIT PETITION NO. 24078 OF 2025 (GM-CPC)
C/W
WRIT PETITION NO. 24085 OF 2025 (GM-CPC)
C/W
WRIT PETITION NO. 31184 OF 2025 (GM-CPC)
C/W
WRIT PETITION NO. 31410 OF 2025 (GM-CPC)
IN WP No. 24078/2025
BETWEEN:
1. QUANTUM INVESTMENT PARTNERS LLC
LLC A LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY
REGISTERED IN THE USA HAVING
ITS HEAD OFFICE AT 18670 MCFARLAND AVENUE,
SARATOGA, CA 95070 THROUGH
ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE
Digitally
signed by MR. SRIPADA MADHUKAR.
CHANDANA 2. AJAY JAIN
BM
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
Location:
High Court of S/O. LATE MR. RAJENDRA JAIN
Karnataka R/O. 4131 MACKIN WOODS LANE,
SAN JOSE, CA 95139,
USA THROUGH GPA HOLDER
MR. SRIPADHA MADHUKAR.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. DHYAN CHINNAPPA, SENIOR COUNSEL APPEARING FOR
SRI. KAUSTUBH JAGIRDAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. M/S DURGA SHREE HEIGHTS PVT LTD.,
A COMPANY INCORPORATED
UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 THROUGH
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:8513
WP No. 24078 of 2025
C/W WP No. 24085 of 2025
WP No. 31184 of 2025
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR HAVING OFFICE AT
NO. 125/1-18, GK ARCADE,
T. MARIYAPPA ROAD, 1ST BLOCK,
JAYANAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 011.
ALSO AT
16/1A, ABDUL HAMID STREET,
5TH FLOOR, KOLKATA - 700 069,
WEST BENGAL.
2. M/S. DURGA PROJECTS AND
INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.
A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER
THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956
THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR
HAVING OFFICE AT NO. 125/1-18,
GK ARCADE, T. MARIYAPPA ROAD,
1ST BLOCK, JAYANAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 011.
ALSO AT
16/1A, ABDUL HAMID STREET,
5TH FLOOR, KOLKATA - 700 069,
WEST BENGAL.
3. NAVRATAN JHUNJHUNWALA
AGED MAJOR,
S/O. MR. OM PRAKASH JHUNJHUNWALA
R/O. C-164, 16TH FLOOR,
SOBHA MAGNOLIA, GURUPANNA PALYA,
MADIVALA, BANNERGHATTA ROAD,
BANGALORE - 560 070.
4. NA VNEET JHUNJHUNWALA
AGED MAJOR,
S/O MR. OM PRAKASH JHUNJHUNWALA
C-1303 CONGO BLOCK,
SNN RAJ LAKE VIEW PHASE 2,
BILEKHAHALLI, BANNERGHATTA ROAD,
BANGALORE - 560 011.
5. NIRAJ JHUNJHUNWALA
AGED MAJOR,
S/O MR. OM PRAKASH JHUNJHUNWALA
R/O FLAT NO. 504, BLOCK-I,
JAIN PRAKRUTI 63/1,
KANAKPURA ROAD,
8TH BLOCK, JAYANAGAR,
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC:8513
WP No. 24078 of 2025
C/W WP No. 24085 of 2025
WP No. 31184 of 2025
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
BANGALORE - 560 082.
ALSO AT
AGED MAJOR,
SALARPURIA SATTVA GREENAGE,
1804, HIBISCUS, BLOCK - A,
BOMMANHALLI,
HOSUR ROAD, NEAR OXFORD COLLEGE,
BANGALORE - 560068,
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. H.S. DWARAKANATH, ADVOCATE FOR R-1 TO R-5
SRI. S.K. MITHUN, ADVOCATE FOR C/R-1)
THIS W.P IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION
OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED
07.07.2025 (ANNEXURE -A) PASSED BY THE LXXXV ADDL. CITY CIVIL
AND SESSIONS JUDGE, COMMERCIAL COURT, BENGALURU (CCH-86) IN
COM. MISC. NO. 7/2025 BY DISMISSING IA NO. III.
IN WP NO. 24085/2025
BETWEEN:
1. QUANTUM INVESTMENT PARTNERS LLC
LIABILITY COMPANY REGISTERED
IN THE USA HAVING ITS HEAD OFFICE AT:
18670 MCFARLAND AVENUE,
SARATOGA, CA 95070
THROUGH ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE
MR. SRIPADA MADHUKAR.
2. AJAY JAIN
S/O. LATE MR. RAJENDRA JAIN
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
R/O. 4131 MACKIN WOODS LANE,
SAN JOSE, CA 95139, USA
THROUGH GPA HOLDER
MR. SRIPADHA MADHUKAR
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. DHYAN CHINNAPPA, SENIOR COUNSEL APPEARING FOR
SRI. KAUSTUBH JAGIRDAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. M/S DURGA SHREE HEIGHTS PVT LTD.,
A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER
THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 THROUGH
-4-
NC: 2026:KHC:8513
WP No. 24078 of 2025
C/W WP No. 24085 of 2025
WP No. 31184 of 2025
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR HAVING OFFICE
AT NO. 125/1-18, GK ARCADE,
T. MARIYAPPA ROAD, 1ST BLOCK,
JAYANAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 011
ALSO AT: 16/1A, ABDUL HAMID STREET,
5TH FLOOR, KOLKATA - 700 069,
WEST BENGAL, INDIA
2. M/S. DURGA PROJECTS AND
INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.
A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER
THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 THROUGH
ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR
HAVING OFFICE AT
NO. 125/1-18, GK ARCADE,
T. MARIYAPPA ROAD, 1ST BLOCK,
JAYANAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 011.
ALSO AT
16/1A, ABDUL HAMID STREET,
5TH FLOOR, KOLKATA - 700 069,
WEST BENGAL.
3. NAVRATAN JHUNJHUNWALA
AGED MAJOR,
S/O .MR. OM PRAKASH JHUNJHUNWALA
R/O C-164, 16TH FLOOR,
SOBHA MAGNOLIA, GURUPANNA PALYA,
MADIVALA, BANNERGHATTA ROAD,
BANGALORE - 560 070.
4. NAVNEET JHUNJHUNWALA
AGED MAJOR,
S/O MR. OM PRAKASH JHUNJHUNWALA
C-1303 CONGO BLOCK,
SNN RAJ LAKE VIEW PHASE 2,
BILEKHAHALLI,
BANNERGHATTA ROAD,
BANGALORE - 5600011
5. NIRAJ JHUNJHUNWALA
AGED MAJOR,
S/O . MR. OM PRAKASH JHUNJHUNWALA
R/O FLAT NO. 504, BLOCK-I,
JAIN PRAKRUTI 63/1,
KANAKPURA ROAD,
8TH BLOCK, JAYANAGAR,
-5-
NC: 2026:KHC:8513
WP No. 24078 of 2025
C/W WP No. 24085 of 2025
WP No. 31184 of 2025
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
BANGALORE - 560 082.
ALSO AT
AGED MAJOR,
SALARPURIA SATTVA GREENAGE,
1804, HIBISCUS, BLOCK - A,
BOMMANHALLI,
HOSUR ROAD, NEAR OXFORD COLLEGE,
BANGALORE - 560 068.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. DWARAKANATH H S.,ADVOCATE
SRI. S.K. MITHUN, ADVOCATE FOR R-1 TO R-5
THIS W.P IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF
INDIA PRAYING TO-SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED
07.07.2025 (ANNEXURE-A) PASSED BY THE LXXXV ADDITIONAL CITY
CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, COMMERCIAL COURT, BENGALURU (CCH-
86) IN COM. MISC. NO. 8/2025 BY DISMISSING IA NO. III.
IN WP NO. 31184/2025
BETWEEN:
1. QUANTUM INVESTMENT PARTNERS LLC
LLC A LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY
REGISTERED IN THE USA HAVING
ITS HEAD OFFICE AT 18670 MCFARLAND AVENUE,
SARATOGA, CA 95070 THROUGH
ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE
MR. SRIPADA MADHUKAR
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS.
2. AJAY JAIN
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
S/O. LATE MR. RAJENDRA JAIN
R/O. 4131 MACKIN WOODS LANE,
SAN JOSE, CA 95139,
USA THROUGH GPA HOLDER
MR. SRIPADHA MADHUKAR.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. DHYAN CHINNAPPA, SENIOR COUNSEL APPEARING FOR
SRI. KAUSTUBH JAGIRDAR, ADVOCATE)
-6-
NC: 2026:KHC:8513
WP No. 24078 of 2025
C/W WP No. 24085 of 2025
WP No. 31184 of 2025
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
AND:
1. M/S DURGA SHREE HEIGHTS PVT LTD.,
A COMPANY INCORPORATED
UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 THROUGH
ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR HAVING OFFICE AT
NO. 125/1-18, GK ARCADE,
T. MARIYAPPA ROAD, 1ST BLOCK,
JAYANAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 011.
ALSO AT
16/1A, ABDUL HAMID STREET,
5TH FLOOR, KOLKATA - 700 069,
WEST BENGAL.
2. M/S. DURGA PROJECTS AND
INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.
A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER
THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956
THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR
HAVING OFFICE AT NO. 125/1-18,
GK ARCADE, T. MARIYAPPA ROAD,
1ST BLOCK, JAYANAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 011.
ALSO AT
16/1A, ABDUL HAMID STREET,
5TH FLOOR, KOLKATA - 700 069,
WEST BENGAL.
3. NAVRATAN JHUNJHUNWALA
AGED MAJOR,
S/O. MR. OM PRAKASH JHUNJHUNWALA
R/O. C-164, 16TH FLOOR,
SOBHA MAGNOLIA,
GURUPANNA PALYA,
MADIVALA, BANNERGHATTA ROAD,
BANGALORE - 560 070.
4. NAVNEET JHUNJHUNWALA
AGED MAJOR,
S/O MR. OM PRAKASH JHUNJHUNWALA
C-1303 CONGO BLOCK,
SNN RAJ LAKE VIEW PHASE 2,
BILEKHAHALLI, BANNERGHATTA ROAD,
BANGALORE - 560 011.
-7-
NC: 2026:KHC:8513
WP No. 24078 of 2025
C/W WP No. 24085 of 2025
WP No. 31184 of 2025
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
5. NIRAJ JHUNJHUNWALA
AGED MAJOR,
S/O MR. OM PRAKASH JHUNJHUNWALA
R/O FLAT NO. 504, BLOCK-I,
JAIN PRAKRUTI 63/1,
KANAKPURA ROAD,
8TH BLOCK, JAYANAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 082.
ALSO AT
AGED MAJOR,
SALARPURIA SATTVA GREENAGE,
1804, HIBISCUS, BLOCK - A,
BOMMANHALLI,
HOSUR ROAD, NEAR OXFORD COLLEGE,
BANGALORE - 560 068.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. H.S. DWARAKANATH, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. S.K. MITHUN, ADVOCATE FOR R-1 TO R-5)
THIS W.P IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION
OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED
14.08.2025 (ANNEXURE -A) PASSED BY THE LXXXV ADDL. CITY CIVIL
AND SESSIONS JUDGE, COMMERCIAL COURT, BENGALURU (CCH-86) IN
COM. MISC. NO. 7/2025 BY DISMISSING IA NO. I.
IN WP NO. 31410/2025
BETWEEN:
1. QUANTUM INVESTMENT PARTNERS LLC
LLC A LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY
REGISTERED IN THE USA HAVING
ITS HEAD OFFICE AT 18670 MCFARLAND AVENUE,
SARATOGA, CA 95070 THROUGH
ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE
MR. SRIPADA MADHUKAR
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS.
2. AJAY JAIN
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
S/O. LATE MR. RAJENDRA JAIN
-8-
NC: 2026:KHC:8513
WP No. 24078 of 2025
C/W WP No. 24085 of 2025
WP No. 31184 of 2025
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
R/O. 4131 MACKIN WOODS LANE,
SAN JOSE, CA 95139,
USA THROUGH GPA HOLDER
MR. SRIPADHA MADHUKAR.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. DHYAN CHINNAPPA, SENIOR COUNSEL APPEARING FOR
SRI. KAUSTUBH JAGIRDAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. M/S DURGA SHREE HEIGHTS PVT LTD.,
A COMPANY INCORPORATED
UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 THROUGH
ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR HAVING OFFICE AT
NO. 125/1-18, GK ARCADE,
T. MARIYAPPA ROAD, 1ST BLOCK,
JAYANAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 011.
ALSO AT
16/1A, ABDUL HAMID STREET,
5TH FLOOR, KOLKATA - 700 069,
WEST BENGAL.
2. M/S. DURGA PROJECTS AND
INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.
A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER
THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956
THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR
HAVING OFFICE AT NO. 125/1-18,
GK ARCADE, T. MARIYAPPA ROAD,
1ST BLOCK, JAYANAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 011.
ALSO AT
16/1A, ABDUL HAMID STREET,
5TH FLOOR, KOLKATA - 700 069,
WEST BENGAL.
3. NAVRATAN JHUNJHUNWALA
AGED MAJOR,
S/O. MR. OM PRAKASH JHUNJHUNWALA
R/O. C-164, 16TH FLOOR,
SOBHA MAGNOLIA,
GURUPANNA PALYA,
MADIVALA, BANNERGHATTA ROAD,
BANGALORE - 560 070.
-9-
NC: 2026:KHC:8513
WP No. 24078 of 2025
C/W WP No. 24085 of 2025
WP No. 31184 of 2025
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
4. NAVNEET JHUNJHUNWALA
AGED MAJOR,
S/O MR. OM PRAKASH JHUNJHUNWALA
C-1303 CONGO BLOCK,
SNN RAJ LAKE VIEW PHASE 2,
BILEKHAHALLI,
BANNERGHATTA ROAD,
BANGALORE - 560 011.
5. NIRAJ JHUNJHUNWALA
AGED MAJOR,
S/O MR. OM PRAKASH JHUNJHUNWALA
R/O FLAT NO. 504, BLOCK-I,
JAIN PRAKRUTI 63/1, KANAKPURA ROAD,
8TH BLOCK, JAYANAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 082.
ALSO AT
AGED MAJOR,
SALARPURIA SATTVA GREENAGE,
1804, HIBISCUS, BLOCK - A,
BOMMANHALLI,
HOSUR ROAD, NEAR OXFORD COLLEGE,
BANGALORE - 560068,
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. H.S. DWARAKANATH, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. S.K. MITHUN, ADVOCATE FOR R-1 TO R-5)
THIS W.P IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION
OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED
14.08.2025 (ANNEXURE -A) PASSED BY THE LXXXV ADDL. CITY CIVIL
AND SESSIONS JUDGE, COMMERCIAL COURT, BENGALURU (CCH-86) IN
COM. MISC. NO. 8/2025 BY DISMISSING IA NO. I.
THESE PETITIONS ARE COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
- 10 -
NC: 2026:KHC:8513
WP No. 24078 of 2025
C/W WP No. 24085 of 2025
WP No. 31184 of 2025
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
W.P.No.31184/2025 and W.P.No.24078/2025 arise out of Com.Misc.No.7/2025 filed by the respondents against the petitioners herein and pending before the commercial court.
W.P.No.31410/2025 and W.P.No.24085/2025 arise out of Com.Misc.No.8/2025 also filed by the respondents against the petitioners herein is pending before the commercial court.
2. Since all the petitions are between the same parties in relation to the similar / identical subject matter, they are taken up together for consideration.
3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the petitioners in all the petitions instituted Com.A.A.Nos.333/2022 and 334/2022 against the respondents under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The respondents entered appearance in the said proceedings, which was disposed of vide order dated 23.02.2023 recording the terms of compromise entered into between the parties who had filed a joint compromise petition. Subsequently, the respondents herein filed Com.Misc.Nos.7/2025 8/2025 under Order 23 Rule 3A r/w Section 151 CPC seeking
- 11 -
NC: 2026:KHC:8513
WP No. 24078 of 2025
C/W WP No. 24085 of 2025
WP No. 31184 of 2025
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
setting aside of the compromise reported in Com.AA.333/2022 and Com.AA.334/2022 respectively on the ground that the same was illegal, void and opposed to law. The said Commercial Miscellaneous proceedings in Com.Mis.Nos.7/2025 and 8/2025 are opposed and contested by the petitioners herein. Meanwhile, the petitioners have instituted execution proceedings to enforce the compromise decree / order passed by the commercial court dated 23.02.2023.
4. In the said proceedings filed by the respondents, they also filed an application I.A.No.1 for stay and an application I.A.No.3 seeking amendment of the Miscellaneous petitions. The commercial court allowed both applications filed by the respondents. Aggrieved by the impugned order of the commercial court allowing I.A.No.1 in both Com.Misc.Nos.7/2025 and 8/2025, petitioner has preferred W.P.No.31184/2025 and W.P.No.24078/2025. Similarly, aggrieved by the impugned order of the commercial court allowing I.A.No.3 in both Com.Misc.Nos.7/2025 and 8/2025, petitioner has preferred W.P.No.31410/2025 and W.P.No.24085/2025.
- 12 -
NC: 2026:KHC:8513
WP No. 24078 of 2025
C/W WP No. 24085 of 2025
WP No. 31184 of 2025
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
5. Heard learned Senior counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for respondents and perused the material on record.
6. In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the petition and referring to the material on record, learned Senior counsel for the petitioners submits that the commercial court committed a grave and serious error of law and fact in allowing I.A.No.1 for stay filed by the respondents by improper and erroneous appreciation of the material on record and without appreciating that neither valid nor sufficient ground had been made out by the respondents for grant of stay. It was submitted that the commercial court erred in granting stay in favour of the respondents unconditionally and summarily without putting them on terms or imposing any conditions for the purpose of grant of stay in their favour and without appreciating that the respondents and petitioners had given effect to and acted upon the compromise dated 23.02.2023 entered into between the parties and as such, the impugned order passed by the commercial court deserves to be set aside and the application filed by the respondents was liable to be dismissed.
- 13 -
NC: 2026:KHC:8513
WP No. 24078 of 2025
C/W WP No. 24085 of 2025
WP No. 31184 of 2025
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
6.1 Learned Senior counsel would also invite my attention to the proposed amendment sought for by the respondents in I.A.No.3 in order to contend that the commercial court failed to appreciate that the said amendment was neither necessary nor relevant for the purpose of adjudication of the issues in controversy between the parties and as such, the impugned order allowing I.A.No.3 also deserves to be set aside and the said application was liable to be dismissed.
7. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents would support the impugned orders and submit that there is no merit in the petitions and that the same are liable to be dismissed.
8. I have given my anxious consideration to the rival submissions and perused the material on record.
9. A perusal of the impugned orders passed by the commercial court allowing I.A.No.1 will indicate that neither valid nor sufficient reasons have been assigned by the commercial court before passing an unconditional order of stay of the compromise decree / order without imposing any terms or conditions upon the respondents who are undisputedly parties to the said compromise
- 14 -
NC: 2026:KHC:8513
WP No. 24078 of 2025
C/W WP No. 24085 of 2025
WP No. 31184 of 2025
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
decree / order. In this context, it is pertinent to note that except stating that for the purpose of effective adjudication of the allegations made by the respondents, no other valid or cogent reason is assigned by the commercial court as to why an order of stay was being granted in favour of the respondents against the petitioners, that too without imposing any conditions or putting the respondents on terms; in other words, the only reason contained at paragraph- 13 of the impugned order will clearly indicate that the same is cryptic, laconic, unreasoned and non-speaking order without assigning sufficient reasons for grant of stay and without properly considering or appreciating the rival contentions, thereby resulting in erroneous conclusion.
10. It is also relevant to state that though both sides had relied upon several judgments in support of their respective contentions, the same have not been considered or appreciated by the commercial court while passing the impugned orders. Under these circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that the impugned orders passed by the commercial court allowing I.A.No.1 filed by the respondents deserve to be set aside and the matter
- 15 -
NC: 2026:KHC:8513
WP No. 24078 of 2025
C/W WP No. 24085 of 2025
WP No. 31184 of 2025
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
remitted back to the commercial court for reconsideration of I.A.No.1 afresh and in accordance with law.
11. Insofar as the impugned orders passed by the commercial court allowing I.A.No.3 for amendment of the Miscellaneous petitions are concerned, a perusal of the impugned orders will indicate that the commercial court has correctly and properly considered and appreciated the proposed amendment and has applied well settled principles of law governing amendment of pleadings and has arrived at a just and proper conclusion that the proposed amendment which is necessary for adjudication of the issues in controversy between the parties merely seeks to elaborate and amplify the existing pleadings and the same do not in any way change or alter the nature or character of the proceedings and no prejudice would be caused to the petitioners, if the amendment was allowed, since they would have an opportunity to controvert the amended pleadings by filing additional statement of objections. In my considered opinion, the impugned order passed on I.A.No.3 filed by the respondents under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC is inconformity with well settled principles of law governing amendment of pleadings including the judgments of the Apex Court
- 16 -
NC: 2026:KHC:8513
WP No. 24078 of 2025
C/W WP No. 24085 of 2025
WP No. 31184 of 2025
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
in the cases of Life Insurance Corporation of India vs. Sanjeev Builders (P) Ltd., - (2022) 16 SCC 1 and Dinesh Goyal @ Pappu vs. Suman Agarwal (bindal) & Others - 2024 INSC 726 and as such, the impugned orders cannot be said to suffer from any illegality or infirmity warranting interference by this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India as held by the Apex Court in the cases of Radhey Shyam Vs. Chhabi Nath - (2015) 5 SCC 423, K.P. Natarajan Vs. Muthalammal - AIR 2021 SC 3443 and Mohamed Ali Vs. V. Jaya & others - (2022) 10 SCC 477.
12. In the result, I pass the following:-
ORDER
(i) W.P.No.31184/2025 and W.P.No.31410/2025 are hereby allowed.
(ii) The impugned orders dated 14.08.2025 passed in Com.Misc.Nos.7/2025 and 8/2025 by the commercial court allowing I.A.No.1 for stay filed by the respondents are hereby set aside.
(iii) The matter is remitted back to the commercial court for reconsideration of I.A.No.1 afresh and in accordance with law.
- 17 -
NC: 2026:KHC:8513
WP No. 24078 of 2025
C/W WP No. 24085 of 2025
WP No. 31184 of 2025
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
(iv) W.P.No.24078/2025 and W.P.No.24085/2025 are hereby dismissed and the impugned orders dated 14.08.2025 passed on I.A.No.3 for amendment filed by the respondents are hereby confirmed.
(v) Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioners to file additional statement of objections to the amended petitions.
(vi) All rival contentions on all aspects of the matter are kept open and no opinion is expressed on the merits / demerits of the rival contentions.
Sd/-
(S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE Srl.