Mr Ramani Sastri Vs Jai Corp Limited

JAI CORP LIMITED HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT A-3, MIDC INDUSTRIAL AREA, NANDED, MAHARASHTRA 431 603, HAVING ITS CORPORATE OFFICE AT 11-12B, MITTAL TOWER, B WING,

¶20

2 -

¶21

NC: 2025:KHC:40675 WP No. 31050 of 2025

¶22

HC-KAR

¶23

1ST FLOOR, NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI 400021 EMAIL CS @JAICORPINDIA.COM. PAN AAACJ2591A

¶24

MR. SHIVADUTT BANNANJE IBBI/PA-002/IP-P00266/2017-2018/10779 INTERIM RESOLUTION PROFESSIONAL OF STERLING DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED, 709, SOUTH BLOCK, MANIPAL CENTRE, DICKENSON ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001

¶25

MR. RAVI SANKAR DEVARAKONDA IBBI/PA-001/IP-P00095/2017-2018/10195 INTERIM RESOLUTION PROFESSIONAL OF STERLING DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED, 41/1, A WING, 2ND FLOOR, 11TH CROSS, 8TH MAIN, JAYANGAR, BANGALORE - 560 011

¶26

…RESPONDENTS

¶27

(BY SRI. C.K. NANDA KUMAR., SR. ADVOCATE FOR SRI. RAGHURAM CADAMBI., ADVOCATE FOR C/R1)

¶28

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (NCLAT) TO HEAR AND PASS APPROPRIATE ORDERS ON THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONERS IN THE APPEAL BEARING FILING NUMBER 9805111/02425/2025 FOR STAY OF THE ORDER DTD. 08.10.2025 (ANNX-A) PASSED BY NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL (NCLT), BENGALURU BRANCH WITHIN A SPECIFIED TIME FRAME AND ETC.

¶29

THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶30

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

¶31

3 -

¶32

NC: 2025:KHC:40675 WP No. 31050 of 2025

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

ORAL ORDER

¶35

Sri.Raghuram Cadambi, counsel who has filed caveat for Respondent No.1 accepts notice for Respondent No.1.

¶36

Notice to Respondents No.2 and 3 are dispensed with in view of the proposed order to be passed.

¶37

The Petitioners are before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:

¶38

a. Direct National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) to hear and pass appropriate orders on the application filed by the petitioners in the appeal bearing filing number 9805111/02425/2025, for the stay of the order dated 08.10.2025 (Annexure-A) passed by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), Bengaluru Branch, within a specified time frame.

¶39

b. Pass an order keeping in abeyance the order dated 08.10.2025 passed by National Company Law Tribunal (Annexure-A) till the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal passes an order on the application filed by the petitioners for stay of the aforementioned order of National Company Law Tribunal in the appeal filed by the petitioners bearing filing number 9805111/02425/2025.

¶40

c. Direct the respondent to pay cost of this petition and grant such other and further reliefs as are just.

¶41

4 -

¶42

NC: 2025:KHC:40675 WP No. 31050 of 2025

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

The submission of Sri.Udaya Holla, learned Senior counsel appearing for the Petitioners is that though an appeal had been filed before the NCLAT, the matter has not been taken up before the NCLAT on the ground that there is a large pendency of matters before it. To support the same, an affidavit of a counsel who had appeared before the NCLAT has been filed.

¶45

Sri.C.K.Nanda Kumar, learned Senior counsel appearing for Respondent No.1 would submit that though it may take some time for the NCLAT to consider the matter, the Petitioners could always move before the NCLAT for such consideration. The reliefs if sought for are granted then the Director would deal with the properties and or the financial assets negating the order passed by the NCLT.

¶46

5 -

¶47

NC: 2025:KHC:40675 WP No. 31050 of 2025

¶48

HC-KAR

¶49

Heard Sri.Udaya Holla, learned Senior counsel for the Petitioners and Sri.C.K.Nanda Kumar, learned Senior counsel for Respondent No.1 and perused papers.

¶50

An appeal having already been filed before the NCLAT, this Court would normally not have intervened in the matter to consider any of the prayer which have been sought for. But if an appeal is filed before the Appellate Tribunal and the Appellate Tribunal were not to take up the matter and keep it pending for considerably long period of time which would cause grave injustice, it would be required for this Court to intervene under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

¶51

An appeal having been filed as indicated supra, it would have but been required for the interim relief if any sought for to be considered as expeditiously as possible since many a time non-consideration of the interim relief would render the entire appeal

¶52

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:40675 WP No. 31050 of 2025

¶53

HC-KAR

¶54

infructuous. It is for that reason that when the matter was mentioned in the morning session, the same has been taken up for consideration in the afternoon session, so that, interim relief if required to be granted could be so granted.

¶55

In the present matter, an IRP has been appointed to take over the management of the Company. In the order passed by the NCLT, there are adequate safeguards which have been imposed as regards the protection of the property of the Company etc., more particularly in para 19. The IRP taking over the management of the company would create several issues which are not being enumerated.

¶56

Be that as it may, this Court is not seized of the appeal but only has to discharge its role as a stopgap arrangement taking into consideration the affidavit which has been filed that the NCLAT has not

¶57

7 -

¶58

NC: 2025:KHC:40675 WP No. 31050 of 2025

¶59

HC-KAR

¶60

taken up the proceedings. In that view of the matter, I pass the following:

¶61

ORDER

¶62

i) The IRP shall not take over the management of Petitioner No.3 and or take any coercive steps in respect to Petitioner No.3 till the matter is considered by the NCLAT.

¶63

ii) The Directors of Petitioner No.3 - Company are restrained from taking any decision or action as regard the properties and or the financial assets of the Petitioner No.3 till orders are passed in that regard by the NCLAT.

¶64

iii) Since the above order is only a stop gap arrangement, the aspect of whether the above order is required to be continued and any further orders are required to be passed is left to the entire discretion of the NCLAT.

¶65