9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (5) TMI 765X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... alled "the respondent") as a company limited by shares on 18.06.1992 vide Certificate of Incorporation No. 55-49222 of 1992-93with the object of carrying on the business, inter alia, of hotels, resorts and restaurants. Presently, the registered office of the petitioner is stated to be situated at B-164, Vikas Nagar, Ranhaulla Road, behind S.M. Tent House, Near Hastsal Village, Uttam Nagar, New Delhi - 110059. 3. The respondent initiated the proceedings under S.560 of the Companies Act, 1956 to strike the name of the petitioner off the register due to defaults in statutory compliances, namely, non-filing of Annual Returns from 1998 to 2014, and Balance Sheets from 1998 to 2014. It has been submitted on behalf of the respondent that procedur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... epresentative, no documents pertaining to S.560 were found. It is further averred that no documents evidencing the basis on which the respondent came to the conclusion that the petitioner-company was not carrying on its business was either provided to the petitioner or was available on the records maintained with the respondent. 6. Admittedly, the registered office of the petitioner was changed from 46, Arakashan Building Road, Paharganj, New Delhi - 55 and to B-164, Vikas Nagar, Ranhaulla Road, Behind S.M. Tent House, Near Hastsal Village, Utttam Nagar, New Delhi - 59. The petitioner is stated to have duly filed Form 18 with the respondent notifying the change in situation of its registered office against receipt dated 03.06.1998 issued b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s under S.560 to the petitioner on the old address of its registered office and the same may not have been received by the petitioner. 9. Counsel for the respondent has submitted that the respondent has no objection to the restoration of the petitioner company's name under Section 560(6) of the Companies Act, 1956, subject to the petitioner filing all statutory documents, i.e. annual returns from 1998 to 2014 and balance sheets as at 1998 to 2014, and other requisite documents along with filing fee and additional fee, as applicable on the date of actual filing. 10. In Purushottamdass and Anr. (Bulakidas Mohta Co. P. Ltd.) v. Registrar of Companies, Maharashtra, & Ors., (1986) 60 Comp Cas 154 (Bom), the Bombay High Court has held, inter al ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ourt in Purushottamdass and Anr. (Bulakidas Mohta Co. P. Ltd.) v. Registrar of Companies, Maharashtra, & Ors. (supra); it is only proper that the impugned order of the respondent dated 23.06.2007, which struck off the name of the petitioner from the Register of Companies, be set aside. At the same time, however, there is no gainsaying the fact that a greater degree of care was certainly required from the petitioner company in ensuring statutory compliances. Looking to the fact that annual returns and balance sheets were not filed for almost sixteen years, the primary responsibility for ensuring that proper returns and other statutory documents are filed, in terms of the statute and the rules, remains that of the management. 12. Accordingl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
