Karnataka High Court
COMAP/403/2026 of SYED ASMATH PASHA QHADRI Vs M/S SHRIVISION LIVING SPACE PVT LTD on 29 August 2026
CNR: KAHC010575032026 NC: 2026:KHC:46818-DB COMAP No. 403 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA COMMERCIAL APPEAL NO. 403 OF 2026 BETWEEN: 1.
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA
COMMERCIAL APPEAL NO. 403 OF 2026
BETWEEN:
1.
SYED ASMATH PASHA QHADRI
S/O. SYED KHADER PASHA
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS
2.
SYED SALMAN YUSUF QHADRI
S/O SYED ASMATH PASHA QHADRI
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
BOTH RESIDING AT
NO.275, 2ND BLOCK JAYANAGAR
BENGALURU - 560 011
…APPELLANTS
(BY SRI SRINIVASA RAGHAVAN, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
SRI A MAHESH CHOWDHARY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
M/S SHRIVISION LIVING SPACE PVT LTD
OFFICE AT NO.40/43
8TH MAIN, 4TH CROSS
RMV EXTENSION, SADASHIVANAGAR
BENGALURU - 560080
REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR
SRI A.M.SUBRAMANYA
ALSO AT 2ND FLOOR, SAMVIT
21ST KM, KANAKAPURA ROAD
UDAYAPURA, BANGALORE - 560 082
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI K N PHANEENDRA, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
SRI N DILLI RAJAN, ADVOCATE)
Digitally
signed by
AMBIKA H B
Location:
High Court
of Karnataka
HC-KAR
THIS COMMMERCIAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION
37(1)(B) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996
READ WITH SECTION 13(1A) OF THE COMMERCIAL COURTS ACT, 2015, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED.03.07.2026
PASSED BY THE XI ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS
JUDGE, (COMMERCIAL COURT) BENGALURU RURAL IN
COM.A.P.NO.9/2026 VIDE ANNEXURE A ON IA NO.3 AND 4
AND ETC.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA
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
(PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE)
1. The appellants have filed the present appeal under Section 37(1)(b) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 [A&C Act] impugning an order dated 03.07.2026 passed by the learned XI Additional District and Sessions Judge (dedicated Commercial Court), Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru [Commercial Court] in Commercial A.P No.9/2026. The respondent had filed the said application under Section 9 of the A&C Act seeking interim measures of protection.
HC-KAR
2. The learned Commercial Court had allowed the said application and has restrained the appellants from interfering with the peaceful and continuous possession of the schedule property till the disposal of the application under Section 34 of the A&C Act.
3. It is relevant to note that the respondent is an unsuccessful party before the arbitral tribunal as the arbitral award dated 08.04.2016 did not substantially accept the claims made by the respondent. However, the arbitral tribunal directed the appellants to refund an amount of `12 crore with interest at the rate of 6% per annum for the pre-litigation period and interest at the rate of 18% per annum for the pendente lite period. In addition, the appellants were also directed to refund certain charges paid on the General Power of Attorney and stamp duty (`37,65,000/- plus `7,55,095/-) along with interest at the rate of 18% per annum and on the said payments being made, the respondent was directed to handover the vacant possession of the subject property to the appellants.
HC-KAR
4. Both the parties have assailed the impugned arbitral award under Section 34 of the A&C Act (Com AP No.9/2026 and Com AP No.12/2026) albeit to a limited extent.
5. The learned counsel for the appellants submits that whilst the appellants have been restrained from interfering with the subject property, no such directions have been issued to the respondent.
6. In view of the above, we consider it apposite to direct that the parties shall maintain status quo as to the nature, title and interest of the subject property as was existing during the arbitral proceedings. None of the parties shall sell, mortgage or create any third party right in respect of the subject property till the disposal of their applications under Section 34 of the A&C Act.
7. We also request the learned Commercial Court to consider the said applications as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of 12 weeks from date.
8. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms.
HC-KAR
9. The pending interlocutory application also stands disposed of.
Sd/- (VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/- (K.S. HEMALEKHA) JUDGE
AHB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13