- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010660972024 NC: 2026:KHC:36478 CA No. 398 of 2024 In CA No.104 of 2003 In COP No.77 of 1987 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI M COMPANY APPLICATION NO. 398 OF 2024 IN COMPANY APPLICATION NO.104 OF 2003 IN COMPANY PETITION NO.77 OF 1987 BETWEEN: 1. MR. ANIRUDH KEDIA, S/O. LATE VINEET KEDIA, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, RESIDING AT H.NO.70, ATTAUR REHMAN LANE, CIVIL LINES, S.O., NORTH DELHI-110054. 2. MR. SHASHWAT KEDIA, S/O. LATE VINEET KEDIA, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, RESIDING AT H.NO.70, ATTAUR REHMAN LANE, CIVIL LINES, S.O., NORTH DELHI-110054. …APPLICANTS (BY SRI. VISHWANATH VENKATESH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD, NO.14/3, 2ND FLOOR, Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010660972024 NC: 2026:KHC:36478 CA No. 398 of 2024 In CA No.104 of 2003 In COP No.77 of 1987 RASHTROTTHANA PARISHAT BUILDING, NRUPATUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU-560001. REPRESENTED BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND MEMBER. 2. THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR OF M/S. SHREE CHAMUNDI MOPEDS LIMITED, CORPORATE BHAVAN, 12TH FLOOR, RAHEJA TOWER, NO.26/27, M.G.ROAD, BENGALURU-560001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.B.PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R1; MS. KRUTIKA RAGHAVAN, ADVOCATE FOR OL FOR R2) THIS COMPANY APPLICATION IS FILED UNDER RULE 6 AND 9 OF THE COMPANIES (COURT) RULES, 1959 ALONG WITH READ WITH ORDER 1 RULE 10 READ WITH SECTION 151 OF THE CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, 1908. THIS COMPANY APPLICATION IS LISTED FOR ARGUMENTS, THIS DAY AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER Sri.Vishwanath Venkatesh., counsel for the impleading applicants; Sri.B.B.Patil., counsel for respondent No.1 and Smt.Krutika Raghavan., counsel for Official Liquidator have appeared in person. After arguing the matter for sometime, counsel for the applicants fairly submits that the application in - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010660972024 NC: 2026:KHC:36478 CA No. 398 of 2024 In CA No.104 of 2003 In COP No.77 of 1987 C.A.No.398/2024 may be disposed of as withdrawn. When queried, counsel for the applicants submits that a conscious decision is taken about the withdrawal of the application and if an order is passed the applicants shall not seek review of the order or modification of the order. The oral submission is placed on record. As the counsel on record has taken a conscious decision about the withdrawal of the application, the Company Application is disposed of as withdrawn. As the impleading application has been withdrawn, they are at a liberty to put forth their grievance and request before the KIADB. Sd/- (JYOTI M) JUDGE MRP List No.:2 Sl No.:13