Karnataka High Court

WP/22820/2026 of EXPLORING INFINITIES EDTECH PRIVATE LIMITED Vs MR. SURAJ RAVICHANDRA NAIK on 3 August 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

CNR: KAHC010507432026 NC: 2026:KHC:40399 WP No. 22820 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 22820 OF 2026 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: EXPLORING INFINITIES EDTECH PRIVATE LIMITED A

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF AUGUST, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

WRIT PETITION NO. 22820 OF 2026 (GM-CPC)

BETWEEN:

EXPLORING INFINITIES

EDTECH PRIVATE LIMITED

A COMPANY INCORPORATED

UNDER LAWS THE OF COMPANIES

ACT, 2013 IN INDIA

HAVING ITS CORPORATE OFFICE

AT BHANZU, NO.483,

SRINIVASA ARCADE, 17TH CROSS,

24TH MAIN ROAD, HSR LAYOUT,

BENGALURU,

KARNATAKA -560 102

THROUGH ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY

MR. SRI SAI SUBRAHMANYA SARMA VELLALA

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI.ARUN KUMAR K., SENIOR COUNSEL FOR

SMT.RASHMI DESHPANDE, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.

MR. SURAJ RAVICHANDRA NAIK

A-1, 303, DHAWAL HILLS SOCIETY,

GAWAND BAUG COMPLEX,

POKHRAN ROAD NO. 2,

NEAR UPVAN LAKE THANE

WEST MAHARASHTRA- 400 610

2.

MR. SAHAJ PURI

HOUSE NO. 27, 20TH MAIN ROAD,

NEAR MBR STARRY APARTMENTS,

ROYAL RESIDENCY LAYOUT,

Digitally

signed by

SUVARNA T

Location:

HIGH

COURT OF

KARNATAKA

HC-KAR

HULIMAVU,

BENGALURU -560 076

KARNATAKA

3.

MR. SAI GOVINDU BHARATH

NO. 301, 2ND FLOOR,

SMR VINAY ESTATE, NEXT TO CCD,

HORVAUE BRIDGE,

BENGALURU-560 043

KARNATAKA

4.

MR. AVINASH SINHA

SOULTREE BY MODERN SPACES

NIRVANA FLAT NO.C-102,

NEAR SOMPURA GATE, SARJAPUR,

BENGALURU

KARNATAKA -562 125

5.

MR. WALZEENA LAVITA D SOUZA

2-46 SILVESTER VILLA BOLLUR,

KOIKUDE POST, DAKSHINA KANNADA,

KARNATAKA -574 146

6.

MR. SANSKAR JAIN

AHIRON KA MOHALLA,

PURANI TONK, TONK,

RAJASTHAN -304 001

7.

MR. VAMSI KRISHNA BELLAMKONDA

H. NO. 1-19-3, NEAR RAMAMANDIRAM,

VYKUNTAPURAM, CHIRALA,

ANDHRA PRADESH-523 155

8.

MS. SILITA SIMANTIKA

ROW HOUSE NO. 44, GOLDENWOODS,

KASAVANAHALLI NEAR PLAY AREA,

OFF. SARAJPUR ROAD,

BENGALURU -560 035

9.

MR. MEVIN MATHEW PAULOSE

HC-KAR

D-713, ORCHID CHS LTD.

CHAMBUR, GOVANDI (EAST),

MUMBAI- 400 088,

MAHARASHTRA

10.

BRIGHT CHAMPS TECH

PRIVATE LIMITED

A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER

THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013

CORPORATE OFFICE AT

1ST FLOOR, 36/6, HUSTLEHUB,

SOMASUNDARAPALYA MAIN ROAD,

PWD QUARTERS,

SECTOR 2, HSR LAYOUT,

BENGALURU-560 102

…RESPONDENTS

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226

AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO

QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 16.07.2026 PASSED BY

THE LD. TRIAL COURT, IN SO FAR AS IT DECLINES TO ALLOW

I.A. NO. 2 IN COM. O.S. NO. 1068/2026 EX-PARTE VIDE

ANNEXURE-A.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS

DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

HC-KAR

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

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…

ORAL ORDER

Aggrieved by the order dated 16.07.2026 in I.A.No.2 in Com.O.S.No.1068/2026 passed by the LXXXVIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, wherein the trial Court failed to consider I.A.No.2 and issued suit summons to the defendants, the petitioner/plaintiff is before this Court.

2. Learned Senior counsel representing the counsel for the petitioner submits that, having considered the prima facie case, the balance of convenience, and irreparable loss, the pre- institution mediation process has been exempted, and I.A.No.3 has been allowed, restraining the defendants from infringing the plaintiff's copyright materials as defined in paragraph No.17(a) of the plaint and from unlawfully misappropriating the plaintiff's proprietary material and confidential information, including its trade secrets and technical know-how, until the next date of hearing, and suit summons have been issued. Learned Senior counsel submits that unless I.A.No.2 is ordered by the trial Court, it would cause lot of hardship to the petitioner, the information will be lost, and it will be difficult for the plaintiff to prove his case. In these circumstances, the

HC-KAR

Court ought to have considered I.A.No.2 and ought to have appointed a commissioner. It is submitted that, looking at the urgency and requirements, this Court may appoint the commissioner. It is submitted that the trial Court ought to have passed the order on the merits of the matter when I.A.No.2 was filed, instead of issuing suit summons.

3. Having heard the learned Senior counsel for the petitioner, perused the entire material on record. The petitioner has filed I.A.Nos. 1, 2 and 3. The trial Court allowed I.A.No.3, exempting the pre-institution mediation, and permitted the plaintiff to institute the suit. This Court has perused the affidavit filed in support of the application and the requirement put forth by the plaintiff as to why an ad-interim order is required in the facts and circumstances of the case, by passing an order on I.A.No.2. The trial Court, having allowed I.A.No.3, ought to have considered I.A.No.2 and based on the facts and circumstances, ought to have passed a reasoned order without issuing suit summons. At the same time, this Court is not inclined to appoint a commissioner, as that has to be done by the trial Court after considering the facts of the case and the

HC-KAR

requirement of passing such an order on I.A.No.2. In these circumstances, this Court is passing the following order:

ORDER

i. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the trial Court to consider I.A.No.2 in accordance with law and pass an order on the merits of the matter within two days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, notwithstanding the fact that the suit summons are not served on the respondents.

ii. All I.As. in this petition shall stand closed.

SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE

MEG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 30

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead