Karnataka High Court
RFA/1770/2026 of MR.SURENDAR KUMAR, Vs M/S JAINSONS LIGHTS PVT LTD on 9 September 2026
CNR: KAHC010625482026 NC: 2026:KHC:49068 RFA No. 1770 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1770 OF 2026 BETWEEN: 1. MR. SURENDAR KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1770 OF 2026
BETWEEN:
1.
MR. SURENDAR KUMAR,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
S/O. DHARMICHAND TODARWAL,
RESIDING AT OLD NO.210,
NEW NO.72,
54TH CROSS,
NEAR RAMMANDIR,
RAJAJINAGAR,
BENGALURU-10,
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI. RAJAGOPALA NAIDU, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
M/S. JAINSONS LIGHTS PVT LTD
ITS DIRECTOR - SRI ANUBHAV JAIN,
S/O.SRI RAJAN JAIN,
1934, 2ND AND 3RD FLOOR,
CHANDNI CHOWK,
DELHI – 110 006.
REP. BY GPA HOLDER,
MS. SHIFALI KADAMPUR,
Digitally
signed by
MADHURI S
Location:
HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
HC-KAR
NO.45/3, 1ST FLOOR,
GOPALA KRISHNA COMPLEX,
RESIDENCY ROAD,
BENGALURU – 560 025.
2.
M/S. RISHI ELECTRICALS,
NO.5, GROUND FLOOR,
SHETTY KRISHNAPPA LANE,
2ND CROSS,
BVK IYENGAR ROAD,
CHICKPET,
BENGALURU – 560 053.
THROUGH ITS PROPRIETRIX,
MRS.VARSHA JAIN,
…RESPONDENTS
THIS RFA IS FILED U/S 96 OF CPC, AGAINST THE ORDER
DATED
03.08.2026
PASSED
ON
I.A.NO.3
IN
COM.EX.NO.173/2022
ON
THE
FILE
OF
THE
LXXXVI
ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, (COMMERCIAL
COURT), BENGALURU AND ETC.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR
HC-KAR
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL JUDGMENT
Office has raised an office objection regarding maintainability of the appeal under Section 96 of the CPC.
2. This appeal is filed against the order dated 03.08.2026 in COM.Ex.No.173/2022 passed on the application filed under Order XXI Rule 58 read with Section 151 of CPC. Therefore, the Office is correct in raising objection regarding maintainability of the appeal. Hence, appeal is dismissed as not maintainable before this Court reserving liberty to the appellant to challenge the said order before the appropriate Court as per provisions available under law.
3. The time spent for prosecuting the appeal before this Court is excluded for the purpose of limitation as per Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963.
4. Registry is directed to return all the original copies to the appellant/counsel for the appellant by retaining photocopy of the appeal papers at the cost of the appellant.
HC-KAR
5. The court fee paid by the appellant shall be returned/refunded on proper identification.
Sd/- (HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) JUDGE
SMJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12