- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41837 WP No. 52644 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO. 52644 OF 2019 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: KOELNER RAWLPLUG IP SP Z.O.O. A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE LAWS OF POLAND HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 6, KWIDZYNSKA STR, 51-416 WROCLAW POLAND, POLAND. REPRESENTED HEREIN BY ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE MR CHRISTOPHER VARGHESE S/O SH VARGHESE D'CRUZ AGED 47 YEARS, RESIDING AT KP-111/55-15, NADAM, KAILAS NAGAR, KAZHA KUTTOM PO, MENAMKULAM, THIRUVANATHAPURAM- 695 582, KERALA. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. SHRISTI WIDGE, FOR SRI. SANJANTHI SAJAN POOVAYYA., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES, BANGALORE MINISTRY OF CORPORATE AFFAIRS, E WING, 2ND FLOOR, KENDRIYA SADAN, KORMANGALA, BENGALURU, KARNATAKA- 560 034. Digitally signed by ARUNKUMAR M S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41837 WP No. 52644 of 2019 2. RAWLPLUG INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR MR SYED ISMAIL HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT DOOR NO 188/A, 6TH MAIN, 1ST CROSS, VIJAYANAGAR, BANGALORE, KARNATAKA- 560 040. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. ANUPAMA HEGDE, CGC FOR R1; SRI. SEETHARAM FOR SMT. MEENA VENUGOPAL, ADVOCATE FOR R2) ------- THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER THE ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 28.01.2019 PASSED BY R-1 PRODUCED ALONG WITH THE INSTANT W.P. AT ANNX-A AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE APPLICATION OF THE PETITIONER PRODUCED ALONG WITH THE INSTANT W.P. AT ANNX-B. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN B GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41837 WP No. 52644 of 2019 ORAL ORDER Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. 2. In this writ petition, the petitioner is assailing the order dated 28.01.2019 passed by Respondent No.1 (Annexure-A) rejecting the Application filed by the petitioner and consequently, sought for allowing the aforesaid Application, produced at Annexure-B to the writ petition. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Respondent No.1 herein that the prayer made in the writ petition has become infructuous as appropriate Application has not been filed by the petitioner before Respondent No.1 seeking restoration of striking of the Company. 4. In this regard, having taken note of the submission made by the learned counsel for the parties, without going into the merits of the case and taking into consideration the provision contained in Section 252 of the Companies Act, I am of the view that, it is open for the petitioner herein to make one more application to Respondent No.1 seeking similar relief. 5. If such an application is filed by the petitioner before Respondent No.1 herein, the same shall be considered by - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41837 WP No. 52644 of 2019 Respondent No.1 in accordance with law. It is also made clear that since the petition is pending consideration before this Court since 2019 and the order impugned is also of the year 2019, I am of the view that, in order to put an end to the issue, petitioner be directed to file one more application similar to Annexure-B to Respondent No.1. If such an application is filed by the petitioner, Respondent No.1 shall consider the same in accordance with law, as stated above. With this observation, writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE rs List No.: 1 Sl No.: 30