SILICON BUILDERS PVT LIMITED vs BINDU PROMOTERS AND DEVELOPERS Advocate - Srikanth Patil — 9207/2013
Case under U/o 7 Rule 1 and 2 and R/w Sec 26 of Cpc Section 0. Status: ARGUMENTS. Next hearing: 27th March 2026.
Com.O.S. - Commercial Original Suit
CNR: KABC170100402020
Next Hearing
27th March 2026
Filing Number
9207/2013
Filing Date
18-12-2013
Registration No
9207/2013
Registration Date
18-12-2013
Court
COMMERCIAL COURT,BENGALURU
Judge
1389-CCH-83 LXXXII ADDL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
SILICON BUILDERS PVT LIMITED
Adv. Manasa B Rao
Respondent(s)
BINDU PROMOTERS AND DEVELOPERS Advocate - Srikanth Patil
JAYESH Z SHAH
Adv. Srikanth Patil
MAHESH KUMAR KHADLOYA
Adv. Srikanth Patil
DHIREN A SUMARYA
Adv. Srikanth Patil
CHETNA .J SHAH
Adv. Srikanth Patil
DIXIT K SHAH
Adv. Srikanth Patil
Hearing History
Judge: 1389-CCH-83 LXXXII ADDL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE
ARGUMENTS
ARGUMENTS
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
SUMMONS
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 16-03-2026 | ARGUMENTS |
| 06-03-2026 | ARGUMENTS |
| 03-03-2026 | EVIDENCE |
| 23-02-2026 | EVIDENCE |
| 20-02-2026 | SUMMONS |
Interim Orders
Summary In COM.O.S. No. 9207/2013, witness PW-2 was recalled and examined on 16.02.2026. The witness, a Director of the Plaintiff company since 2016, testified regarding a 2006 sale transaction, though acknowledged lacking personal knowledge and relying on documentary evidence. During cross-examination, the witness addressed various procedural matters and denied allegations that the suit was filed to harass the Defendant or that property attachments occurred after 2010. No re-examination was conducted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary In COM.O.S. No. 9207/2013, witness PW-2 was recalled and examined on 16.02.2026. The witness, a Director of the Plaintiff company since 2016, testified regarding a 2006 sale transaction, though acknowledged lacking personal knowledge and relying on documentary evidence. During cross-examination, the witness addressed various procedural matters and denied allegations that the suit was filed to harass the Defendant or that property attachments occurred after 2010. No re-examination was conducted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts