[2025:RJ-JP:25304] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.7696/2016 1. M/s Vimla Devi Agro Tech Limited, having its registered office, Khasra No.168, Village Pollai kalan Tehsil Digod, Kota-Baran Road, Distt. Kota (Rajashan) and Factory at Khasra No.168, Pollai Kalan, Tehsil-Digod, Kota-Baran Road, Kota (Rajasthan), through Director Mr.Varun Gupta. 2. Brij Kishore Gupta S/o Shri Shrinath Gupta, Resident of Near Cooperative Bank, Kherliganj, Atru District, Baran. 3. Chandra Mohan Singhal S/o Shri Prem Chand Singhal, Resident of Plot No.45, Near Kota Blood Bank, Basant Vihar, Kota. 4. Varun Gupta S/o Shri Giriraj Kumar Agarwal, Resident of Plot No.45, Near Kota Blood Bank, Basant Vihar, Kota. 5. Bitthal Agarwal S/o Shri Prem Chand Singhal, Resident of Plot No.45, Near Kota Blood Bank, Basant Vihar, Kota. 6. Gayatri Devi W/o Late Shri Om Prakash near Cooperative Bank, Kherliganj, Atru District Baran. 7. Giriraj Kumar Agarwal S/o Shri Prem Chand Singhal, Resident No Near Cooperative Bank, Kherliganj, Atru District Baran. 8. Radha Agarwal W/o Shri Bitthal Agarwal, Resident of Plot No.45, Near Kota Blood Bank, Basant Vihar, Kota. 9. Om Prakash Sharma S/o Shri Rameshwar Prasad, Near Cooperative Bank Kherliganj, Atru District Baran. 10. Lokesh Kumar Sharma S/o Shri Rameswar Prasad, Near Cooperative Bank Kherliganj, Atru District Baran. 11. Shyam Sundar Sharma S/o Shri Rameshwar Prasad, Near Cooperative Bank Kherliganj, Atru, District Baran. 12. Ramavtar Sharma S/o Shri Rameshwar Prasad, Near Cooperative Bank Kherliganj, Atru, District Baran. 13. Shri Nath Gupta S/o Shri Gajanand Mahajan, R/o rajpura Ward, Baran. ----Petitioners Versus State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur, CAD Dadabari, Kota through its Chief Manager. ----Respondent [2025:RJ-JP:25304] (2 of 2) [CW-7696/2016] For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Pulkit Arora for Mr.Vinod Pathak For Respondent(s) : Mr.Alok Garg JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 09/07/2025 1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that after initiation of the insolvency proceedings, now, the resolution professional has been appointed to look after the matter and petitioners cannot appear in this petition. 2. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the instant writ petition has been preferred against the impugned notice dated 08.03.2016 by which name of the petitioners was included in the list of wilful defaulters. Counsel submits that after passing of the aforesaid order, much water has flown and now, the original application submitted by the respondents before the DRT has been decreed vide order dated 27.06.2019 and the said order has not been assailed by the petitioners before any forum of law, hence, under the changed circumstances, this petition has become infructuous. 3. Considering the above factual aspect of the matter, this writ petition is rendered infructuous. Stay application and all pending application(s), if any, also stand dismissed. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Aayush Sharma /66