2018 (4) TMI 1967 - HC - Companies Law

Striking off of names of the companies in which the petitioners were Directors from the Register of Companies - Section 164 of the Companies Act, 2013 - HELD THAT - The names of the companies in which the petitioners were Directors were struck off from the Register of Companies and a list of disqualified directors under Section 164(2) (a) of the Companies Act, 2013 has been issued by the second respondent on 8.9.2017. Now the last date for filing the annual return has been extended from 29.11.2017 to 30.4.2018 under the Condonation of Delay Scheme, 2018. Therefore, the impugned order is liable to be interfered with. Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
1. Interpretation of Section 164 of the Companies Act, 2013 regarding the financial year deadline for Annual General Meeting and annual return filing.
2. Validity of striking off companies from the Register of Companies and disqualifying directors under Section 164(2)(a) of the Companies Act, 2013.
3. Application of the Condonation of Delay Scheme, 2018 in extending the deadline for filing annual returns.
4. Impact of pending writ petitions with interim stay orders on the present case.

Analysis:
1. The petitioners argued that as per Section 164 of the Companies Act, 2013, the financial year deadlines were as follows: 31.3.2015 for the first year, 31.3.2016 for the second year, and 31.3.2017 for the third year. They contended that the last date for conducting the Annual General Meeting for the third financial year was 30.9.2017, and the deadline for filing the annual return was 29.11.2017. However, the companies in which the petitioners were directors were struck off from the Register of Companies on 8.9.2017, leading to their disqualification under Section 164(2)(a). The petitioners highlighted that the deadline for filing the annual return was extended to 30.4.2018 under the Condonation of Delay Scheme, 2018, and sought intervention against the impugned order.

2. Considering the existence of pending writ petitions on similar issues with interim stay orders, the court decided to grant an interim stay in the present case. The court referred to specific writ petition numbers and dates where orders had been passed, indicating that the interim stay would apply to all similarly situated individuals with pending writ petitions and interim orders. The court emphasized that the order dated 26.3.2018 in a specific case would also be applicable to the current case.

In conclusion, the judgment addressed the interpretation of Section 164 of the Companies Act, 2013 in relation to financial year deadlines, the consequences of companies being struck off from the Register of Companies, the application of the Condonation of Delay Scheme, 2018, and the impact of pending writ petitions with interim stay orders on the present case. The court provided temporary relief by granting an interim stay based on the circumstances of the case and the existence of similar matters with interim orders.