9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2010 (4) TMI 599X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n No. 55-64119 as a private limited company with the Registrar of Companies, NCT of Delhi and Haryana. Petitioner No. 2 is Mr. Harpal Singh Yadav, a Director as well as shareholder of petitioner No. 1. 3. The Registrar of Companies, i.e., the respondent herein, struck the petitioner No. 1's name off the Register for defaults in statutory compliances, namely, failure to file balance-sheets as at 31-3-2003 to 31-3-2005 and 31-3-2007 and failure to file annual returns made up to 30-9-2003 to 30-9-2005 and 30-9-2007. The respondent had initiated proceedings under section 560 of the Companies Act, 1956, for the purpose of striking the name of the company off the Register maintained by the respondent. It is submitted by the respondent that the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , is stated to have been communicated to the respondent on 22-11-2002 in the requisite Form 18. Proof of receipt of this intimation by the office of the respondent is also on record. 6. However, the address of the petitioner No. 1 in the challan issued by the respondent in respect of the fee for filing Form 20B for the year ending 30-9-2006, is still shown as 'A-34, Rewari Line Industrial Area, Phase I, New Delhi', which is the old address of the petitioner No. 1. Therefore, there is every possibility that the address of the petitioner No. 1 in the records of the respondent, has remained unchanged, despite due intimation of the same by the petitioner No. 1 to the respondent in 2002. Consequently, any notice issued by the respondent to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0-9-2003 to 30-9-2005 and 30-9-2007, balance sheets as at 31-3-2003 to 31-3-2005 and 31-3-2007, along with the filing and additional fee, as applicable on the date of actual filing. The certificates of 'No Objection' of the Directors, as well as those of the shareholders, to the restoration of the name of the company to the Register maintained by the respondent, have been placed on record as well. 9. In Purushottamdas v. Registrar of Companies [1986] 60 Comp. Cas. 154 (Bom.), it has been held, inter alia, that : "20. The object of section 560(6) of the Companies Act is to give a chance to the company, its members and creditors to revive the company which has been struck off by the Registrar of Companies, within a period of 20 years, and t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
