2021 (3) TMI 1275 - HC - Companies Law

Erroneous deactivation of Director Identification Number (DIN) of the petitioner - non-compliance of the provisions of Section 164 of the Companies Act, 2013 - HELD THAT - It is evident that there was no fault on the part of the petitioner justifying deactivation of the DIN of the petitioner under Section 164 of the 2013 Act. Moreover, it was rather beyond the scope of the jurisdiction of the Registrar of Companies to direct that the documents filed by the Directors would not be approved/registered/recorded and thus would not be available in the registry for public viewing, thereby depriving the petitioner and other Directors from exercising their legal rights in that regard. Application is allowed, thereby setting aside the deactivation of the DIN of the petitioner and the operation of the portion of the order dated June 24, 2016 passed by the Registrar of Companies at Kolkata, by which it was directed that the documents filed by the Directors of the Company would not be approved/registered/recorded and would not be available in the registry for public viewing - application allowed.

Summary

Issues involved:
Deactivation of Director Identification Number (DIN) under Section 164 of the Companies Act, 2013 due to a dispute between major shareholders affecting document filing and public viewing.

Analysis:
The judgment addressed the issue of the erroneous deactivation of the petitioner's DIN under Section 164 of the Companies Act, 2013. The petitioner contended that despite complying with relevant provisions, the deactivation was unjustified. It was highlighted that a dispute between major shareholders led to a restraint order by the Registrar of Companies, preventing the approval and public viewing of documents filed by the petitioner. The court noted that the deactivation was unwarranted as there was no fault on the petitioner's part. It was emphasized that the Registrar's directive to withhold approval of documents exceeded its jurisdiction, depriving the petitioner and other directors of their legal rights.

The judgment allowed the writ petition, setting aside the deactivation of the petitioner's DIN and the portion of the Registrar's order related to document approval and public viewing restriction. The respondent-authorities were directed to promptly restore and reactivate the petitioner's DIN. No costs were awarded, and certified copies of the order were made available to the parties upon request. The decision aimed to rectify the unjust deactivation of the petitioner's DIN and restore their legal rights affected by the dispute among major shareholders.