M/S Italix Living Spaces Private Ltd. Vs Pardhanani Chatrabhuj… — Arbitration | Karnataka HC (2025)

M/S Italix Living Spaces Private Ltd. Vs Pardhanani Chatrabhuj… — Arbitration | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Appeal disposed of with the clarification that the order and findings recorded by the Commercial Court would have no force and would not come in the way of the Arbitral Tribunal deciding the contentions of either party on merits; the pending interlocutory application, if any, stands disposed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the order dated 18.10.2025 passed in Commercial A.A.No.401/2024 by the LXXXIV Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-85) ought to be set aside. +2 more

Court's answer

With the aforesaid clarification, the appeal is disposed of, and consequently the pending interlocutory application, if any, stands disposed.

Ratio / Principle

Once the arbitration proceedings are commenced, the effect of the Commercial Court's order and the finding recorded therein would not have any force.

Key takeaways

Any finding or observation made by the Commercial Court would not come in the way of the Arbitral Tribunal deciding the contentions of either of the parties on merits.ratio¶46

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

COMAP No.584/2025 (High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru, decided 08.12.2025): Appeal under S.13(1A) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 by M/s. Italix Living Spaces Pvt. Ltd. and Vasudevan Sathyamoorthy against the order dated 18.10.2025 of the LXXXIV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-85) in Commercial A.A.No.401/2024, whereby interim relief under S.9 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 was granted beyond the scope of the relief sought and later extended, operating over Schedules 'A', 'B' and 'C' although the dispute concerned only Schedule 'C'. Since, pursuant to the High Court's order in CMP No.10/2025 appointing an Arbitrator, arbitration proceedings had already commenced, the Court held that the effect of the Commercial Court's order and the findings recorded therein would have no force, and that no finding or observation of the Commercial Court would come in the way of the Arbitral Tribunal deciding the parties' contentions on merits; with this clarification the appeal was disposed of and the pending interlocutory application stood disposed. (Oral judgment per Vijaykumar A. Patil, J.; bench comprising Anu Sivaraman and Vijaykumar A. Patil, JJ.)

1 -

NC: 2025:KHC:51758-DB COMAP No.584/2025

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

AND

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL COMMERCIAL APPEAL NO.584/2025

BETWEEN:

Digitally signed by ARSHIFA BAHAR KHANAM Location: High Court Of Karnataka

M/S. ITALIX LIVING SPACES PRIVATE LTD (CIN U45500KA2018PTC115146) A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013 HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.38, ULSOOR ROAD, BANGALORE-560042 DULY REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTORS/AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY APPELLANT NO.2.

MR. VASUDEVAN SATHYAMOORTHY (DIN 00022732) AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS R/AT NO.32, SAOH, PRIME STREET RICHMOND ROAD, BANGALORE-560025.

…APPELLANTS

(BY SRI. SHYAM SUNDAR M.S. SR. ADV., FOR SMT. VANDANA P.L. ADV.,)

AND:

PARDHANANI CHATRABHUJ BASSARMAL S/O LATE BASSARMAL HOTCHAND PARDHANANI AGED ABOUT 83 YEARS R/AT FLAT NO.1504, AI MAS TOWERS DUBAI, MARINA

2 -

NC: 2025:KHC:51758-DB COMAP No.584/2025

HC-KAR

P.O. BOX 5418, DUBAI, UAE AND BANGALORE R/AT NO.46/3, FAIR FIELD LAYOUT RACE COURSE ROAD, BENGALURU-560001 REP. BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER MR. M. SAHADEVA REDDY S/O LATE SRI. M. BASI REDDY AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS R/AT NO.185, AMAR JYOTHI LAYOUT 5TH MAIN, DOMLUR INNER RING ROAD BENGALURU-560071.

MR. DURBHAKULA VAMSI SAI (DIN 08094719) AGED MAJOR WORKING FOR GAIN AT NO.38 ULSOOR ROAD, BENGALURU-560042.

MR. S. SAI PRASAD AGED MAJOR WORKING FOR GAIN AT NO.38 ULSOOR ROAD, BENGALURU - 560042.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. SATYANAND B.S. ADV., FOR R1)

THIS COMAP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 13(1-A) OF COMMERCIAL COURTS ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 18.10.2025 PASSED IN COMMERCIAL A.A.NO.401/2024 PASSED BY THE LXXXIV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, AT BENGALURU (CCH-85), AND GRANT SUCH OTHER AND FURTHER RELIEFS AS THIS HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT AND PROPER UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY (VIDE ANNEXURE -A).

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN and

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL

3 -

NC: 2025:KHC:51758-DB COMAP No.584/2025

HC-KAR

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL)

This appeal is filed under Section 13(1A) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, seeking for the following relief:

"Wherefore, the appellant humbly prays that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside the order dated 18.10.2025 passed in Commercial A.A.No.401/2024 passed by the LXXXIV Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, at Bengaluru (CCH-85) and grant such other and further reliefs as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity."

2. Sri.Shyam Sundar M.S., learned Senior counsel

for the appellant submits that the Commercial Court, in exercise of power under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), granted the relief more than the scope of the relief sought and the said interim order was extended later. It is further submitted that now the parties to the proceedings

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:51758-DB COMAP No.584/2025

HC-KAR

are before the Arbitral Tribunal and the proceedings are going on. In view of the finding recorded by the Commercial Court, the right under Section 17 of the Act is taken away by the Commercial Court. It is also submitted that the dispute is only in respect of 'C' schedule property. However, by virtue of the interim order of the Commercial Court, the temporary injunction granted by the Commercial Court is operating in respect of Schedule 'A', 'B' and 'C' properties which is required to be clarified.

Per contra, Sri.B.S.Satyanand, learned counsel for the respondent submits that the arbitration proceedings have already been commenced and this appeal becomes infructuous. It is submitted that today insofar as the interim relief, the Arbitrator intends to consider the same and for the sake of clarification, the matter is adjourned. It is further submitted that the appeal has rendered infructuous and seeks to dismiss the same.

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:51758-DB COMAP No.584/2025

HC-KAR

We have heard the arguments of the learned

counsel for the appellant, the learned counsel for the respondent and meticulously perused the material available on record. We have given our anxious consideration to the submissions made on both the sides.

Having considered the rival contentions and the material produced on record, it is not in dispute that this Court in CMP No.10/2025 ordered for appointment of an Arbitrator and pursuant to the said order, the arbitration proceedings have commenced as is evident from the memo filed by the respondent. It is to be noticed that once the arbitration proceedings are commenced, the effect of the order and the finding recorded would not have any force. It is to be further noticed that any finding or observation made by the Commercial Court would not come in the way of the Arbitral Tribunal deciding the contentions of either of the parties on merits.

6 -

NC: 2025:KHC:51758-DB COMAP No.584/2025

HC-KAR

With the aforesaid clarification, this appeal is

disposed of. Consequently, the pending interlocutory application, if any, stands disposed.

Sd/(ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE

Sd/(VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE

RV

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 51