- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:42314 MFA No. 5290 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 5290 OF 2025 (KPIDFA) BETWEEN: MR. AAMIR OMAIS S/O. ABDUL REHMAN T AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, R/AT NO.238/A, MODI ROAD, DEVARAJIVANAHALLI, BENGALURU EAST, BENGALURU - 560 045. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. MAHADEVAIAH K.B, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY, FOR M/S. AALA VENTURES LTD., DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (URBAN), BENGALURU, KANDAYA BHAVAN, BENGALURU - 560 009. 3. M/S. AALA VENTURES LTD., REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1955, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO.403, Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:42314 MFA No. 5290 of 2025 3(RD) FLOOR, 5(TH) CROSS, 5(TH) MAIN, 1(ST) STAGE, 3(RD) BLOCK, H.B.R. LAYOUT, KALYAN NAGAR POST, BENGALURU - 560 043 REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN MR. NADIM AHMED. 4. MR. NADIM AHMED S/O. LATE NISAR AHMED AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, NO.403, 3(RD) FLOOR, 5(TH) CROSS, 5(TH) MAIN, 1(ST) STAGE, 3(RD) BLOCK, H.B.R. LAYOUT, KALYAN NAGAR POST, BENGALURU - 560 043. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VEERESH R. BUDIHAL, ADVOCATE AND SRI. RAKSHITH M.N, ADVOCATE FOR C/R2) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.16 OF THE KARNATAKA PROTECTION OF INTEREST OF DEPOSITORS IN FINANCIAL ESTABLISHMENTS ACT, 2004, AGAINST THE ORDER DT.25.11.2022 PASSED IN MISC.NO.27/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE XCI ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPL. JUDE FOR KPIDFE CASES, BENGALURU, (CCH-92), ALLOWING THE PETITIONS FILED U/S.5(2) OF THE KPIDFE ACT,2004 WITH COST. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT Learned counsel for the appellant has filed a memo seeking leave of this Court to withdraw the appeal with a - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:42314 MFA No. 5290 of 2025 liberty to file a fresh suit and also to direct the office to release the certified copies of documents pertaining to this case. 2. The memo is placed on record. 3. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn with a liberty to file fresh suit. Further, the impugned order, certified copy produced in this case shall be returned to the appellant with cost and the said cost to be borne by the appellant. 4. The time spent for prosecuting the appeal before this Court is excluded for the purpose of limitation as per Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963. 5. In view of disposal of main appeal, IA No.1/2025 stands disposed of. Sd/- (HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) JUDGE SSD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8 CT: BHK