Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2010 (4) TMI 1168

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ipulated limitation period, and to the decision of the Bombay High Court in PURUSHOTTAMDASS VERSUS REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES [ 1984 (4) TMI 247 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY] which says that 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 to give them an opportunity of carrying on the business only after the company judge is satisfied that such restoration is necessary in the interests of justice. To my mind, this petition deserves to be allowed, although a greater degree of care was certainly required from the petitioner company in ensuring statutory compliances. Looking to th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he company on the Register of Companies maintained by the Registrar of Companies. M/s Medtech Pharma (India) Private Ltd. was incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 on 17th March, 1998 vide Certificate of Incorporation No. 55-92763 as a private limited company with the Registrar of Companies, NCT of Delhi and Haryana. 2. The main business of the petitioner company is stated to be of cost and freight agents with pharmaceutical companies operating in Delhi. 3. The Registrar of Companies, i.e the respondent herein, struck the petitioner company's name off the Register due to defaults in statutory compliances, namely, annual returns for the period 30.09.2000 to 30.09.2008 and balance sheets for the period 31.03.2000 to 31.03.2008. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n served with the requisite notices under S.560 of the Companies Act by the respondent. 6. The petitioner avers that the accounts of the petitioner company were prepared and audited every year, and that the company had engaged the services of an Accountant to perform the task of filing the returns with the office of the Registrar of Companies. It is submitted that, after incorporation, the petitioner company did not get much business, and that there were frequent changes in the company's staff, including the Accountant, and therefore, the returns and other necessary documents were not filed with the Registrar of Companies, even though the same had been prepared and even signed by the Managing Director. It is further submitted that it .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ears, and to give them an opportunity of carrying on the business only after the company judge is satisfied that such restoration is necessary in the interests of justice. This decision has been followed by this Court in M/s Deepsone Non-Ferrous Rolling Mills Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Registrar of Companies, NCT of Delhi and Haryana , CP No. 285/2009; M/s Kakku E and P Control Pvt. Ltd. Anr. Vs. The Registrar of Companies, NCT of Delhi and Haryana, CP No. 409/2008 and M/s Sohal Agencies Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Registrar of Companies, NCT of Delhi and Haryana , CP No. 297/2009. 9. To my mind, this petition deserves to be allowed, although a greater degree of care was certainly required from the petitioner company in ensuring statutory compliances. Lo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ice and requirements of the statute would be met merely by the payment of costs of the Registrar of Companies. It is difficult to believe that although the petitioner company was functioning for eight years, along with a properly staffed secretarial department, even though the same suffered frequent changes, the management was so preoccupied with other matters that they were unable to spare time to inquire from its staff as to whether the annual returns and other statutory documents were being filed. It is also equally improbable that the staff of the company was precluded from informing the Managing Director, or other Directors, of the fact that the statutory returns mandated under the Companies Act are not being filed. The whole matter ha .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates