::1:: APHC010588602024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] MONDAY ,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 30723/2024 Between: Kalyan Muppaneni Founder ...PETITIONER AND The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. JYOTHI RATNA ANUMOLU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. VARUN BYREDDY 2. 3. CHILUKURI KARTHIK ::2:: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 30723 of 2024 This Court made the following ORDER: Heard learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and learned Senior Counsel for 3rd Respondent. 2. Learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the 3rd Respondent herein is proceeding further contrary to the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Civil Appeal No.847/2025 dated 22.01.2025 which reads thus: “We, however, clarify that the impugned judgment passed by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal will not come in the way of the adjudicating authority/Interim Resolution Professional in examining the subject Form FA and also deciding as to whether or not the proceedings should be dropped in terms of the Section 12A of the IBC.” 3. Learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner submits that as per the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court, till the examination of FA and also proceedings in terms of Section 12A of the IBC by the adjudicating authority / Interim Resolution Professional, the 3rd Respondent should ::3:: not proceed further in Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) proceedings. Therefore, the 3rd Respondent is not entitled to proceed further with the CIRP proceedings in violation of orders of Hon’ble Apex Court. Hence the Writ Petition. 4. On the other hand, learned Senior Counsel appearing for 3rd Respondent specifically stated that the 3rd Respondent already filed 12A application before the National Company Law Tribunal, Amaravati for adjudication. Till the disposal of the 12A proceedings, the 3rd Respondent undertakes not to proceed further with the CIRP proceedings. 5. Learned counsel appearing for 2nd Respondent submits that the CIRP proceedings are independent one and orders of the Hon’ble Apex Court as mentioned above nowhere indicates about the “status quo” regarding the CIRP proceedings without completing the adjudication in respect of the 12A application under IBC. 6. Having regard to the submissions made by learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner and learned Senior Counsel for 3rd Respondent and in view of the specific and categorical assurance by the 3rd Respondent, as extracted supra, this Court is of the considered opinion that in view of the clear and categorical submission of both the Senior Counsel, neither further adjudication nor any further orders are ::4:: necessary in this petition at this juncture. Therefore, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing both parties to avail their respective remedies before National Company Law Tribunal, Amaravati in accordance with law. 7. With the above observation, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications if any pending, shall stand closed. ______________________________________ JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA Dt:17.02.2025 Krk ::5:: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA 72 WRIT PETITION NO:30723 of 2024 Dt: 17.02.2025 krk