Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 21266 (KAR)

M/S. SHIVA TEXYARN LIMITED v. M/S. INDIANA DIARY SPECIALITIES LTD. (IN LIQN.)

CA/71/2025 · 2026-06-11

Jyoti M

Civil Appealbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28311 CA No. 71 of 2025 In COP No.4 of 1998 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI M COMPANY APPLICATION NO.71 OF 2025 IN COMPANY PETITION NO.4 OF 1998 BETWEEN: M/S. SHIVA TEXYARN LIMITED 56, NORTH BOAG ROAD, T. NAGAR, CHENNAI-600 017 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, MR. MUTHURAMAN(NOT IN SERVICE) HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.52, EAST BASHYAKARALU ROAD, R.S.PURAM, COIMBATORE-641 002, TAMILNADU, REPRESENTED BY ITS LEGAL OFFICER, MR. C.S.RAMAKANTH …APPLICANT (BY SMT. AKSHATA PRASAD M., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SANJAY H.SETHIYA, ADVOCATE) AND: M/S. INDIANA DIARY SPECIALITIES LTD. (IN LIQN.) REPRESENTED BY OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR, ATTACHED TO THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, CORPORATE BHAVAN, NO.26-27, 12TH FLOOR, RAHEJA TOWERS, M.G.ROAD, BENGALURU-560001. …RESPONDENT (BY SMT. KRUTIKA RAGHAVAN, ADVOCATE FOR OL) Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28311 CA No. 71 of 2025 In COP No.4 of 1998 THIS COMPANY APPLICATION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 446 OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 FOR GRANT OF LEAVE TO CONTINUE PROCEEDINGS IN CIVIL SUIT NO.1100/2022 PENDING BEFORE THE COMMERCIAL COURTS, CHENNAI. THIS COMPANY APPLICATION IS LISTED FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER Smt.Akshata Prasad.M., counsel on behalf of Sri.Sanjay H.Sethiya., for the applicant has appeared through video conferencing. Smt.Krutika Raghavan., counsel for the Official Liquidator has appeared in person. Counsel for the applicant submits that a memo has been filed stating that the application in C.A.No.71/2025 may be dismissed as withdrawn. When queried, counsel for the applicant submits that a conscious decision is taken about the withdrawal of the application and if an order is passed the applicant shall not seek review of the order or modification of the order. Counsel, therefore, submits that the memo may be placed on record and the Company Application may be dismissed as withdrawn. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28311 CA No. 71 of 2025 In COP No.4 of 1998 The oral submission and the memo is placed on record. As the counsel on record has taken a conscious decision about the withdrawal of the Company Application, the Company Application is dismissed as withdrawn. Sd/- (JYOTI M) JUDGE MRP List No.: 2 Sl No.:22.1