9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (3) TMI 1395 - HC - Companies LawRestoration of the name of the company in the register of companies - Section 252 of Companies Act 2013 - HELD THAT - The contention of the petitioner that the company is entitled to avail the benefit of Ext.P4(b) scheme, since the appeal was filed before the stipulated date, cannot be accepted in view of the provisions contained in the scheme itself which came into force only on or after 15.01.2021. The applicability of the scheme is confined to only those companies, for which restoration was ordered between 01.12.2020 and 31.12.2020. There is nothing in Ext.P4(b) which provides that, mere filing of an appeal would enable the companies to avail the benefit of the scheme, even if the appeal irrespective of the date of disposal of the appeal directing restoration. There are no merit in the claim of the petitioner - petition dismissed.
Issues:
Claiming benefit of Ext.P4(b) scheme for company restoration under Companies Act. Analysis: 1. The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking the benefit of Ext.P4(b) scheme introduced by the Government of India for the restoration of a company that was struck off under Section 248(1) of the Companies Act. The petitioner submitted an application under Section 252 of the Companies Act before the NCLT on 27.11.2020, and the NCLT passed an order on 12.01.2021 directing the restoration of the company. The petitioner argued that since the application was submitted before the introduction of the scheme, they should be eligible for its benefits. 2. The Ext.P4(b) scheme was introduced by the Central Government to condone delays in filing forms with the Registrar under the Companies Act. The scheme was applicable to companies ordered to be restored between 01.12.2020 and 31.12.2020. The respondent contended that the petitioner's company was not eligible for the scheme as the appeal was disposed of only on 12.01.2021, after the scheme's cutoff date. The Companies Fresh Start Scheme, 2020 was also in force only until 31.12.2020. 3. The Court examined the provisions of Ext.P4(b) scheme, particularly Clause 5 which specified the scheme's applicability from 01 February 2021 and the last date for filing overdue e-forms as 31.03.2021. The scheme was applicable to companies whose restoration orders were issued between 01.12.2020 and 31.12.2020. The Court concluded that the petitioner's company did not meet the criteria for the scheme as the appeal was disposed of after the scheme's introduction on 15.01.2021. 4. The Court dismissed the writ petition, stating that the petitioner's claim for the benefit of the Ext.P4(b) scheme was without merit. However, the Court mentioned that the petitioner could seek appropriate relief by approaching the Central Government. The judgment emphasized that the scheme's applicability was limited to companies restored within the specified period, and the mere filing of an appeal did not automatically entitle a company to the scheme's benefits. 5. In summary, the Court ruled against the petitioner's claim for the benefit of the Ext.P4(b) scheme due to the scheme's specific applicability criteria and the timing of the company's restoration order. The judgment highlighted the importance of meeting the scheme's requirements for eligibility and suggested seeking alternative relief from the Central Government.
|
