Disposed

Mr. Suraj P., v. M/S Sourberry E and P LLP

Karnataka HC12 Jan 2026WP/39354/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition seeking a direction to the Commercial Court to decide interim injunction applications in an LLP dispute. The High Court disposed of the petition by directing the Commercial Court to pass orders on IA Nos.1/2025 and 2/2025 within ten days from the next hearing date, leaving all merits open.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Commercial Court to decide IA Nos.1/2025 and 2/2025 within ten days from 21.01.2026; no injunction granted by this Court.

Mr. Suraj P., Vs M/S Sourberry E and P LLP — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:1660 WP No. 39354 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.39354 OF 2025 (GM-CPC)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

MR. SURAJ P., SON OF DR. K.S. PALANETHRA, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.416, 10^TH MAIN, ALANAHALLI EXT., SIDDHARTHA NAGAR, ALANAHALLI, MYSORE – 570 028.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. VIKRAM HUILGOL, SERNIOR ADVOCATE APPEARING FOR SRI. SHREERAM TIMMAPPA NAYAK, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by MADHURI S Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶13

M/S SOURBERRY E AND P LLP, REGISTERED LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP, REGISTERED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP ACT, 2008 HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.25/3, TEKKEN COURT, 2^ND FLOOR, LAVELLE ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER MR. NAVEEN PREM.

¶14

MR. NAVEEN RAKSHITH YOGAKIRTHI, PARTNER,

¶15

SON OF NAVEEN PREM, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.109, RAKESH FANTASY GARDEN APT, KASTURI NAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 043.

¶16

¶17

NC: 2026:KHC:1660 WP No. 39354 of 2025

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

MR. SURAJ M V, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, SON OF LATE VISHWANATH, RESIDING AT NO.816, 16^TH CROSS, 7^TH BLOCK WEST, JAYANAGAR, BANASHANKARI II STAGE, BANGALORE - 560 070.

¶20

MR. DEEPAK G AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, SON OF GUNDAPPA GOVINDARAJU, RESIDING AT NO.2220, 24^TH ‘A’ CROSS, 4^TH MAIN, K.R. ROAD, BANASHANKARI II STAGE, BENGALURU – 560 070.

¶21

…RESPONDENTS

¶22

(BY SRI. B. MANJUNATH, ADVOCATE)

¶23

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR SUCH OTHER APPROPRIATE WRITS AND ALLOW IA NO.2 UNDER ORDER XXXIX RULE 1 AND 2 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, 1908 IN COM A.A.NO.494/2025 BY LXXXVI ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, COMMERCIAL COURT UNIT AT BENGALURU (CCH-87) AT ANNEXURE – A, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC.

¶24

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

¶25

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

¶26

ORAL ORDER

¶27

In this petition, petitioner seeks the following reliefs:

¶28

“ (a) Issue a writ of mandamus or such other appropriate writs and allow IA No.2 under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 in Com A.A.No.494/2025 BY LXXXVI Additional City Civil and

¶29

¶30

NC: 2026:KHC:1660 WP No. 39354 of 2025

¶31

HC-KAR

¶32

Sessions Judge, Commercial Court Unit at Bengaluru (CCH-87) at Annexure-A in the interest of justice and equity.

¶33

(b) Consequently grant an order of temporary injunction restraining the respondents along with his agents, supporters, representatives, henchmen etc., from operating the operations of the Limited Liability Partnership in the name and style of “SOURBERRY E & P LLP” (hereinafter referred to as “LLP”) as per the provisions of Limited Liability Partnership Act, 2008 registered in the Registrar of Companies, Karnataka at Bengaluru vide Registration No. LLPIN: AAY-7252 in the Application Schedule Property, until disposal of the above application and pass other suitable orders.

¶34

(c) Grant such other reliefs as this Hon’ble Court deems fit to grant in the circumstances of the case.”

¶35

Heard learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record.

¶36

Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner would reiterate and submit that while the Commercial Court has passed an ad interim exparte order of temporary injunction on IA No.1/2025, the Commercial Court has directed issuance of emergent notice on IA No.2/2025 and as such, the petitioner is

¶37

¶38

NC: 2026:KHC:1660 WP No. 39354 of 2025

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

before this Court by way of the present petition. It is submitted that the petitioner has already made submissions on both IA No.1/2025 and IA No.2/2025 in Com.A.A.No.494/2025, which presently stands posted before the Commercial Court on 21.01.2026 and as such, the Commercial Court may be directed to dispose of both IA No.1/2025 and IA No.2/2025 within a stipulated time frame.

¶41

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the respondents would appear before the Commercial Court on 21.01.2026 and file objections, documents, etc., and the Commercial Court may be directed to dispose of the applications in accordance with law.

¶42

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and joint submissions made by both sides, I deem it just and appropriate to dispose of this petition by directing the Commercial Court to consider and pass appropriate orders on IA No.1/2025 and IA No.2/2025 in Com.A.A.No.494/2025, in accordance with law within a period of ten days from 21.01.2026.

¶43

¶44

NC: 2026:KHC:1660 WP No. 39354 of 2025

¶45

HC-KAR

¶46

All rival contentions on all aspects of the matter

¶47

including merits / demerits of the rival contentions of both sides are kept open and no opinion is expressed on the same.

¶48

Sd/(S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE

¶49

SV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 34

Mr. Suraj P., v. M/S Sourberry E and P LLP

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. Suraj P., v. M/S Sourberry E and P LLP

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Krishnegowda Vs Thimmegowda

Sri T B Nagaraju Vs Sri Ganganarasaiah

P K Vinaydev Vs Sri S Krishna

Sri. Chikkabyarappa Vs Sri. Ramesh G

Sri Prakash B G Vs Smt Anitha M

Sri Joseph Vs Smt. Susan Abraham