9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 949X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... As the appellant tried to submit that because of the striking off of the present company the directors have been affected due to DIN getting blocked and they are aggrieved because they are connected with other companies also. Learned counsel was unable to show that any such ground was taken before NCLT or in the Company Petition. As such we have not allowed the learned counsel to raise this new ground for the first time in the appeal. Again, it would also be no ‘just’ cause under Section 252(3) of the new Act. Appeal dismissed. - Company Appeal (AT) No. 147 of 2018 - - - Dated:- 22-5-2018 - Mr. A.I.S. Cheema And Mr. Balvinder Singh, JJ. For The Appellants : Ms. Asmita Deshpande, Advocate For The Respondents : None JUDGEMENT A.I.S. CHEEMA, J. : The Appellant Company is Private Limited Company. It was struck off from the Register of Companies vide notification dated 17th July, 2017 for failure to file Financial Statements and Annual Returns. In response to show cause notice from respondents the appellant had informed on 20th February, 2017 that the Directors of the Applicant Company were in the process of winding up and they will comply with the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the winding up procedure and the company could have an honourable exit. 4. We have gone through the impugned order. The NCLT has in details recorded in initial part of its judgment the pleadings made by the appellant/petitioner. (We wish the concerned NCLT at Bangaluru Bench will give at least paragraph numbers in the Judgment so that reference would be easy). At page 3 of the certified copy of the impugned order the learned NCLT referred to the case put up by registrar of companies as under: The Registrar of Companies has filed Counter affidavit dated 18th January, 2018 along with the Annexures. The Registrar of Companies herein denies all the averments made in the Petition save the averments which are specially admitted herein below and submit his counter to the Petition as under: i.) The Petitioner Company is a private limited company incorporated on 21.02.2012 vide CIN NO. U72900KA2012PTC062633. The Registered Office of the Petitioner Company is situated at No.230, Lake Shore Homes Layout, Kasavanahalli village, Sarjapur Road, Bengaluru -560037. The copy of the Company Master Data is shown as Annexure I. ii.) It is submitted that on verification of the MC ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efaulting companies were crystallized, the Respondent proceeded to strike of the name of the Petitioner Company from the Register of Companies and published a notice in STK-7 in the homepage of the MCA on 17.07.2017. A copy of the said STK-7 Notice is shown as Annexure- IX . It was also published in the official Gazette on 29.07.2017 stating that the from 17.07.2017 names of the companies mentioned therein including the petitioner company have been struck off from the Register of Companies as per sec 248(5) of the Act. A copy the publication made in the Official Gazette on 29.07.2017 is shown as Annexure-X. vi.) It is stated in the petition that the applicant company was a non-functional company at the time of strike off and that it wants the company to be revived only for the purpose of winding up of the company. vii.) The Petitioner has prayed that the name company be restored to the Register of Companies under section 252 of the Act. Subject to the satisfaction of this Hon ble Tribunal and in the event of this Hon ble Tribunal willing to revive the Company, then the Respondent humbly prays that this Hon ble Tribunal may kindly, a) Direct the petitioner to un ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 017. The Company has mentioned that the Company wants to go for winding up as per para 4.7 of the petition which is reproduced below: That the applicant avers that the Company had commenced its product development activity immediately after incorporation until June, 2013. However, could not generate any revenue and was not conducting any business thereafter. The Board had also decided to wind up the Company since there was no potential for business. Vide para 4.11(reproduced below), the Petitioner Company confirms that the Bank Accounts have been closed: That the bank account maintained with HDFC Bank was also closed as on 31.03.2016. Copy of the Bank closure letter enclosed as Annexure-H. After hearing the Counsel for the Petitioner Company and perusal of the material on record the report of the Registrar of Companies, Karnataka and ongoing through the provisions of Section 252(3) of the Companies Act, 2013, this Tribunal is of the view that the applicant company was a non-functional company at the time of strike off its name and that the company wants to be revived only for the purpose of winding up of the company. The citations relied upon by the learned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
