C.M.P.No.7028 of 2026 in O.S.A.No.249 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 01.07.2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P. VELMURUGAN AND THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE K. GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI C.M.P.No.7028 of 2026 in O.S.A.No.249 of 2020 M/s.Lanco Infratech Limited Represented by its Director, Mr.Kudapa Udaya Baskar …. Petitioner Vs 1. M/s.Chennai Metro Rail Limited Represented by the Chief General Manager (Arbitration & Contract Management) Admin Building CMRL Depot, Poonamallee High Road, Koyambedu Chennai – 600 107. 2. M/s.Lanco Infratech Limited Represented by its Liquidator Lanco House, 4th Floor, 25 G.N.Chetty Road T.Nagar, Chennai – 600 017. 1/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.P.No.7028 of 2026 in O.S.A.No.249 of 2020 3. K.D.Arcot 4. A.Jagannathan 5. G.Sivakumar …. Respondents Prayer : Miscellaneous Petition filed under Order XIV Rule 8 of the Madras High Court Original Side Rules read with Order I Rule 10(2) and Section 151 of C.P.C, praying to substitute the petitioner herein as duly represented by its new management, in place of the second respondent herein in the subject O.S.A.No.249 of 2020. For Petitioner : Ms.R.Moneshaa O R D E R (Made by P.Velmurugan, J.) This Civil Miscellaneous Petition has been filed seeking to substitute the petitioner, represented by its new management, in the place of the second respondent in the above appeal. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the materials available on record. 2/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.P.No.7028 of 2026 in O.S.A.No.249 of 2020 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner Company, which was under liquidation, has been sold as a going concern to a third party, and that the said acquisition plan has been approved by the National Company Law Tribunal, Hyderabad. It was further submitted that the entire control and management of the petitioner Company now stand vested in the new Board of Directors. As such, the second respondent no longer has any role to play in the affairs of the petitioner Company. Therefore, the learned counsel prays that the petitioner Company, represented by its new management, be substituted in the place of the second respondent. 4. However, from the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, it is evident that the name of the petitioner Company has since undergone a change of name. In such circumstances, the petitioner ought to first seek appropriate relief for bringing the changed name of the Company on record. Without doing so, the present prayer for substitution cannot be considered. Accordingly, this miscellaneous petition is dismissed. However, it is open to the petitioner Company to file a fresh petition seeking appropriate 3/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.P.No.7028 of 2026 in O.S.A.No.249 of 2020 relief for bringing its changed name on record and for consequential substitution, if so advised. (P.V.,J.) (K.G.T.,J.) 01.07.2026 ms 4/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.P.No.7028 of 2026 in O.S.A.No.249 of 2020 P.VELMURUGAN, J. AND K.GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI, J. ms C.M.P.No.7028 of 2026 in O.S.A.No.249 of 2020 01.07.2026 (1/2) 5/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis