- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49222 CA No. 252 of 2025 & CA No.253 of 2025 In CA No.786 OF 2006 In COP No. 166 of 2001 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI M COMPANY APPLICATION NO. 252 OF 2025 AND COMPANY APPLICATION NO.253 OF 2025 IN COMPANY APPLICATION NO. 786 OF 2006 IN COMPANY PETITION NO. 166 OF 2001 IN CA NO.252 OF 2025 BETWEEN: M/S. KIRLOSKAR OIL ENGINES LTD., LAXMAN RAO KIRLOSKAR ROAD, PUNE - 411003. …APPLICANT (BY SRI. MAHESH S., ADVOCATE) AND: OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR OF THE MYSORE KIRLOSKAR LTD. (IN LIQN)., ATTACHED TO THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CORPORATE BHAVAN, NO.26-27, 12TH FLOOR, RAHEJA TOWERS M.G.ROAD, BENGALURU -560001. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. SHRISHAIL NAVALGUND, ADVOCATE FOR OL) Digitally signed by THEJAS KUMAR N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49222 CA No. 252 of 2025 & CA No.253 of 2025 In CA No.786 OF 2006 In COP No. 166 of 2001 THIS COMPANY APPLICATION IS FILED UNDER RULE 9 OF COMPANY (COURT) RULES 1959 AND UNDER SECTION 151 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908, READ WITH SECTION 5 OF THE LIMITATION ACT. IN CA NO.253 OF 2025 BETWEEN: M/S. KIRLOSKAR OIL ENGINES LTD., LAXMAN RAO KIRLOSKAR ROAD, PUNE - 411003. …APPLICANT (BY SRI. MAHESH S., ADVOCATE) AND: OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR OF THE MYSORE KIRLOSKAR LTD. (IN LIQN)., ATTACHED TO THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CORPORATE BHAVAN, NO.26-27, 12TH FLOOR, RAHEJA TOWERS M.G.ROAD, BENGALURU -560001. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. SHRISHAIL NAVALGUND, ADVOCATE FOR OL) THIS COMPANY APPLICATION IS FILED UNDER RULE 9 OF COMPANY (COURT) RULES, 1959 AND UNDER SECTION 151 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908. THESE COMPANY APPLICATIONS ARE LISTED FOR ORDERS THIS DAY AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49222 CA No. 252 of 2025 & CA No.253 of 2025 In CA No.786 OF 2006 In COP No. 166 of 2001 ORAL ORDER Sri.Mahesh S., counsel for the applicant and Sri. Shrishail Navalgund, counsel for the official liquidator, have appeared in person. 2. Counsel Sri. Mahesh S. submits that the respondent's evidence was taken as nil on 15.11.2022. Hence, two applications are filed in C.A.No.252/2025 to recall the order dated 15.11.2022 and C.A.No.253/2025 for substitution. He argued by saying that sufficient cause is shown to condone the delay and order for the substitution. Hence, he submits that the applications may be allowed. 3. Counsel Sri. Shrishail Navalgund, counsel for the official liquidator, vehemently opposed allowing the applications. 4. Heard the arguments. and perused the applications and the affidavits with care. 5. As is evident from the papers, the evidence of the respondent was taken as nil. The applications are allowed. The delay is condoned on payment of the cost of Rs. 50,000/- - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49222 CA No. 252 of 2025 & CA No.253 of 2025 In CA No.786 OF 2006 In COP No. 166 of 2001 (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) payable to the office of the official liquidator. It is made clear that the applicant is permitted to lead evidence upon proof of cost. The official of the applicant Company is directed to appear before CPC for recording evidence on 10.12.2025 without fail. It is made clear that the applicant shall not seek adjournment. 6. Resultantly, C.A.No.252/2025 and C.A.No.253/2025 are allowed. SD/- (JYOTI M) JUDGE KMV List No.:1 Sl No.: