IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APARESH KUMAR SINGH AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.M.MOHIUDDIN WRIT PETITION No. 40164 of 2025 DATED : 08.01.2026 Between:

P. Narotham Rao … Petitioner AND The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, Through its Registrar at Ezhilagam, 6^th, PWD Estate, Chepauk, Triplicane, Chennai, Tamil Nadu and four others.

… Respondents

ORDER:

Mr. Ashutosh B Joshi, learned counsel for the petitioner.

Ms. B. Shiva Teja, learned counsel represents Mr. Sriram Polali, learned counsel for the Central Government appears for respondent Nos.1 and 5.

Mr. Raja Shekar Rao Salvaji, learned counsel appears for respondent Nos.2 and 3.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Upon service of notice, respondent No.2 Bank has appeared through Mr. Raja Shekar Rao Salvaji, learned counsel.

3. The issue involved is in a short compass, which is reflected in order dated 31.12.2025 as under:

“Mr. Ashutosh B Joshi, learned counsel appears for the petitioner.

Mr. Sriram Polali, learned counsel for Central Government appears for respondent Nos.1 and 5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been compelled to approach this Court as no order has yet been delivered on the stay application in I.A.No.1534 of 2025 moved by the petitioner/borrower in Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No.547 of 2025, which is pending before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal at Chennai, though the orders on the stay application I.A.No.1534 of 2025 have been reserved on

29.10.2025.

Issue notice on respondent Nos.2 to 4.

Let personal notice be served on respondent Nos.2 to 4 apart from Speed Post and to file proof of the same.

List the matter on 08.01.2026.

4. Learned counsel for the respondent Bank submits that the petitioner could have mentioned before the learned National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) at Chennai on the pending orders reserved on

29.10.2025 on his I.A.No.1534 of 2025 seeking stay. He submits that a joint mention can be made before the learned NCLAT in that regard.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that because of the delay in pronouncing of the order on the stay application, further proceedings under resolution plan as approved by the National Company Law Tribunal is under way.

6. In the facts and circumstances involved in the present petition, we are of the view that the petitioner and the respondent Bank should make a joint mention before the learned NCLAT at Chennai in respect of the stay application in which orders have been reserved on 29.10.2025. Since the matter is in session by the learned NCLAT, it could not be proper for this Court to enter into the issues on merits which the petitioner is trying to agitate. Needless to say that the learned NCLAT would consider the request of the parties as apparently the petitioner is facing proceedings under the resolution plan approved by the National Company Law Tribunal.

7. Accordingly, the instant writ petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs.

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.

____________________________ APARESH KUMAR SINGH, CJ ____________________________

G.M.MOHIUDDIN, J Date: 08.01.2026.

ES