9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (4) TMI 1906X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inion it is just that the name of the company is to be restored to the register of companies maintained by RoC, such orders can be passed for the name of the company to be so restored. The name is directed to be restored - application allowed. - Company Appeal No. 127/252/ND/2018 - - - Dated:- 25-4-2018 - R. Varadharajan, Member (J) And Dr. V.K. Subburaj, Member (T) For Petitioner : N.P.S. Chawla For Respondent : Manish RajLakshmi Gurung ORDER R. Varadharajan, Member (J) 1. This is an appeal which has been filed under the provisions of section 252(1) read with section 252(3) of the Companies Act, 2013 seeking to restore the name of the company, namely, Three Star Properties (P.) Ltd. which has been struck off by the respondent, Registrar of Companies (RoC), under the provisions of section 248 of the Companies Act, 2013 due to non-filing of annual returns and financial statements for the three years preceding to the date of striking off. Perusal of the averments made in the appeal discloses that the appellant-company was incorporated on 8th October, 2010 with the object to carry out real estate business of acquiring and dealing with immovable properti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ents or annual returns for a continuous period of three financial years and that thereafter upon further enquiries it is represented by appellant No. 2 that it was seen that the name of the appellant No. 1-company had been struck off and, hence, this appeal seeking for the restoration of the name consequent to the directions by the honble High Court of Delhi issued in Writ Petition(C) No. 9933 of 2017 titled Kanwar Pal Singh v. Union of India and Others . The ground on which this appeal seems to have been filed is mainly on the basis of the submission that the appellant No. 1-company was in business and has been carrying out its operations at the time of impugned notice for striking off the name and that the company had also convened its annual general meeting (AGM) regularly since its incorporation and it has also been regular in filing its Income-tax Returns ever since its inception without fail. The transactions in relation to immovable property demonstrates the ground of preferring this appeal and which according to the learned counsel for appellant justifies that the company is in operation of business as it pertains to the activities of real estate and that even as of today ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tween the appellant-company and DPIPL dated 15th November, 2010. Learned counsel for the appellant also points out that it has been meticulous in filing, as stated in the appeal, returns with the Income-tax Department year after year since its incorporation and that AGMs have also been held and audited financial statements had also been duly approved, proof for all of which has also been annexed along with the appeal. Learned counsel for the appellant at the time of oral submissions also relies upon the judgment of Bombay High Court reported in : [1986] 60 Comp Cass 154 (Bom.) in the matter of Purushottamdas v. Registrar of Companies, Maharashtra as well as the decision of the honble High Court of Delhi in Co.Pet. No. 174/2013 in M.A. Panjwani v. Registrar of Companies : [2015] 124 CLA 109 (Del.) for the purpose of invoking the grounds of just clause for restoration of the name of the appellant-company. Learned counsel for the appellant also places reliance on the decision of the honble High Court of Delhi in CP No. 406 of 2009 rendered in Kalinga Paper Mills (P.) Ltd. v. Ministry of Corporate Affairs : [2010] 101 SCL 321 (Del.) to canvass for the proposition that while litigatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the company to be restored to the register of companies, and the Tribunal may, by the order, give such other directions and make such provisions as deemed just for placing the company and all other persons in the same position as nearly as may be as if the name of the company had not been struck off from the register of companies. From a perusal of the decision of the honble High Court of Delhi, as stated above in CP No. 174/2013 [M.A. Panjwani (supra)] while construing section 560(6) of the Companies Act, 1956 pari materia to present section 252(3), as extracted above of the Companies Act, 2013, it has been held that the word just has to be understood in the background of the specific language of the sub-section not on the basis of the principle of ejusdem generis. Going further the honble Judge therein elucidates that apart from the situation in which the company court can order restoration, namely, (i) when the company was carrying on business or was in operation at the time of striking off its name there exists an alternative situation, (ii) where it appears just to the company court that the name of the company be restored to the register and that the rule of ejusdem ge ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
