Smt Porkodi Vs M/S Royaloak Infrastructure LLP — Company and Corporate | Karnataka HC (2025)

Smt Porkodi Vs M/S Royaloak Infrastructure LLP — Company and Corporate | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition allowed: impugned order dated 04.11.2025 on I.A.Nos.2 and 3 in Com.O.S.No.1513 of 2024 (Commercial Court, Bengaluru CCH-83) set aside; I.As.2 and 3 allowed; P.W.1 recalled for further cross-examination and stage reopened, subject to cross-examination commencing 26.11.2025 and completing within a week in a phased manner, payment of Rs.10,000/- cost (plus earlier Rs.1,000/-) by the next date of hearing, and expeditious completion per the Commercial Courts Act, 2015.

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ petition filed by the petitioner/defendant seeking to set aside the impugned order dated 04.11.2025 (rejecting I.A. Nos.2 and 3 for reopening the case and recalling P.W.1 for further cross-examination in Com.O.S.No.1513 of 2024) should be allowed.

Court's answer

On perusal of the impugned order and hearing both counsel, in view of the fair submission made by the learned counsel for the respondent/plaintiff, the petition deserves to be allowed, with certain conditions.

Ratio / Principle

The impugned order dated 04.11.2025 passed on I.A.Nos.2 and 3 in Com.O.S.No.1513 of 2024 pending on the file of the LXXXII Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Commercial Court, Bengaluru (CCH-83) is set aside; consequently, I.As.2 and 3 are allowed.

Key takeaways

P.W.1 is recalled for further cross-examination by the defendant, and the stage is reopened.ratio¶47
The defendant/petitioner shall cross-examine P.W.1 tomorrow, i.e., on 26.11.2025, and shall complete the cross-examination within a week's time; the Commercial Court shall go on with the matter expeditiously.ratio¶48
The Commercial Court shall permit the defendant to cross-examine P.W.1 within a week's time in a phased manner.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (Articles 226 & 227 - Certiorari) - Karnataka HC (Justice Pradeep Singh Yerur), 25.11.2025 - WP No. 35442 of 2025 (GM-CPC). Defendant in Com.O.S.No.1513 of 2024 (LXXXII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Commercial Court, Bengaluru CCH-83) sought quashing of the trial court's order dated 04.11.2025 rejecting her I.A.Nos.2 and 3 for reopening the case and recalling P.W.1 for further cross-examination. Held: in view of the fair submission of the respondent's counsel (who raised no objection if cross-examination commenced the next day and concluded within a week), the petition was allowed with conditions - the impugned order was set aside, I.As.2 and 3 allowed, P.W.1 recalled and the stage reopened; cross-examination to commence on 26.11.2025 and be completed within a week in a phased manner; defendant to pay costs of Rs.10,000/- over and above the earlier Rs.1,000/- by the next date of hearing; Commercial Court directed to proceed and complete proceedings per the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 expeditiously. No precedents cited; single-judge oral order; no dissent.

1 -

NC: 2025:KHC:48784 WP No. 35442 of 2025

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR

WRIT PETITION NO. 35442 OF 2025 (GM-CPC)

BETWEEN:

SMT PORKODI

AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS OLD W/O, MR SELVADURAI RESIDING AT NO.2 BANGALORE HIGHWAY ROAD, VARADARAJASPURAM TIRUVALLUR NAZARPETTAI TAMIL NADU - 600 123.

…PETITIONER

Digitally signed by GAVRIBIDANUR SUBRAMANYA GUPTA SREENATH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

(BY SMT. JYOTHI S K, ADVOCATE)

AND:

M/S ROYALOAK INFRASTRUCTURE LLP OFFICE AT 4^TH FLOOR NO.5 RAJ SQUARE VIJAYA BANK COLONY BANASWADI OUTER RING ROAD BANGALORE - 560 043. REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER

2 -

NC: 2025:KHC:48784 WP No. 35442 of 2025

HC-KAR

MR.S. MATHAN (COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER COMPANIES ACT)

…RESPONDENT

(BY SRI. VIJAYKUMAR PRAKASH, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. K R BHARADWAJ, ADVOCATE)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER SUITABLE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 04.11.2025 PASSED ON I.A.NO.2 AND I.A.NO.3 FOR REOPEN AND RECALL OF PW1 FOR FURTHER CROSS-EXAMINATION BY THE COURT OF THE LXXXII ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, COMMERCIAL COURT, BANGALORE (CCH-83) VIDE ANNEXURE-K AND ETC.,

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR

3 -

NC: 2025:KHC:48784 WP No. 35442 of 2025

HC-KAR

ORAL ORDER

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent.

The present petition is filed by the petitioner/ defendant seeking to set aside the impugned order dated 04.11.2025 passed on I.A. Nos.2 and 3 in Com.O.S.No.1513 of 2024, pending on the file of learned LXXXII Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Commercial Court, Bengaluru (CCH-83).

The defendant filed applications I.A. Nos.2 and 3 in Com.O.S.No.1513 of 2024 seeking to reopen the case and recall P.W.1 for further cross-examination. The applications came to be rejected by the trial Court by a reasoned order.

The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner/defendant is that the impugned order is illegal, perverse and arbitrary as the Commercial Court has not provided an opportunity to the defendant to further crossexamine P.W.1 as certain aspects were to be questioned to P.W.1, which the defendant is now seeking to do by virtue of this petition. She also contends that if a week's time is

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:48784 WP No. 35442 of 2025

HC-KAR

granted, she would complete the cross-examination by making a beginning of the cross-examination tomorrow when the matter is listed before the Commercial Court and complete it within a week's time thereafter.

Per contra Sri Vijaykumar Prakash, learned counsel

appearing on behalf of Sri K.R.Bharadwaj, learned counsel for the caveator/respondent submits that he would not have much objection if the petitioner/defendant goes on with the crossexamination tomorrow without fail and positively completes the cross-examination within a week's time, starting from tomorrow. He also contends that sufficient opportunity was given to the defendant and he has fully cross-examined P.W.1 on 02.07.2025. Thereafter, time was being taken deliberately to protract the proceedings. Nevertheless, he has no inclination to further drag on the proceedings by objecting to this petition and he fairly submits that if the defendant crossexamines P.W.1 tomorrow and completes it within a week's time, this petition could be allowed by imposing costs.

I have perused the impugned order and on hearing

the submissions of both learned counsels, in view of the fair

5 -

NC: 2025:KHC:48784 WP No. 35442 of 2025

HC-KAR

submission made by the learned counsel for the respondent/plaintiff, the petition deserves to be allowed, with certain conditions.

Accordingly, I pass the following:-

ORDER

i) The Writ Petition is allowed . ii) The impugned order dated 04.11.2025 passed on I.A.Nos.2 and 3 in Com.O.S.No.1513 of 2024 pending on the file of learned LXXXII Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Commercial Court, Bengaluru (CCH-83), is set aside. Consequently, I.As.2 and 3 are allowed.

iii) P.W.1 is recalled for further cross-examination by the defendant. So also the stage is reopened.

iv) The defendant/petitioner shall cross-examine P.W.1 tomorrow i.e., on 26.11.2025 and shall complete the cross-examination within a week's time. The Commercial Court shall go on with the matter expeditiously.

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:48784 WP No. 35442 of 2025

HC-KAR

v) The Commercial Court shall permit the defendant to cross-examine P.W.1 within a week's time in a phased manner.

vi) The defendant shall pay the cost of Rs.10,000/- in addition to the earlier cost of Rs.1,000/- imposed, to be paid on or before the next date of hearing.

vii) The Commercial Court shall proceed to complete the proceedings in accordance with the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 expeditiously.

SD/(PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE

Bss

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 59