Delhi High Court
Nitasha Gaurav Exports Pvt. Ltd vs Registrar Of Compnies Nct Of Delhi ... on 12 September, 2014
Author: Sanjeev Sachdeva
$~18
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CO.PET. 8/2014
NITASHA GAURAV EXPORTS PVT. LTD...... Petitioner
Through : Mr. Manoj Kumar Garg, Mr. R.K.
Rana, Advocates.
versus
REGISTRAR OF COMPNIES NCT OF DELHI & HARYANA
..... Respondent
Through : Mr. P.L. Malik, Deputy ROC,
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
ORDER
% 12.09.2014
SANJEEV SACHDEVA J (ORAL)
1. The petitioner company has filed the present petition under
Section 560 (6) of the Companies Act seeking restoration of the
name of the petitioner company in the records of the Registrar
of Companies.
2. The company was incorporated on 5th November, 1992. The
name of the company was struck off from register of
Companies by order dated 31st May, 2007.
3. It is submitted that since the incorporation, the company has
been regularly complying with the provisions of the Companies
Act and filing the statutory documents with the Registrar of
Companies. It is submitted that the statutory documents till the
year 2007 have been filed.
4. It is stated that on account of an inadvertent error and lapse of
an Accountant, the statutory records could not be filed after
2007. The fact of non filing of the requisite documents came to
the notice of the Directors and Shareholders in June 2013. It is
submitted that the company had been regularly paying the
Income Tax. It is submitted that the lapse was inadvertent and
on account of bonafide circumstances beyond control of the
Directors and Shareholders.
5. The petitioners have undertaken that the petitioners shall duly
comply with the statutory requirements and shall file the up-to-
date annual returns and balance sheet as required under the
Companies Act along with the requisite fee and the additional
fees as provided.
6. The name of the company was struck off and Official Gazette
notification dated 23.6.2007 was published. The name of the
company was struck off for non-filing the annual returns and
not furnishing the other statutory compliances as per the
Provisions of the Companies Act, 1956.
7. Notice in the petition was issued to the Registrar of Companies.
The respondent/Registrar of Companies has filed the reply
dated 24.4.2014. It has been submitted that due procedure and
process was followed for striking off the name of company
from the register of companies.
8. It is further submitted that the petition has been filed for revival
of the company by Mr. Inder Dev Sharma and Ms. Neeta Devi
Sharma in capacity of Directors whereas as per the records
available with the Registrar of Companies, the said persons are
neither members, directors nor creditors.
9. The petitioner has filed a rejoinder affidavit dated 23.6.2014
stating that Mr. Inder Dev Sharma and Ms. Neeta Devi Sharma
were appointed as additional Directors w.e.f. 23rd November,
2006 and the said Directors have been signing the balance
sheets and filing the Income Tax returns and same has been
mentioned in notice of Annual General Meeting held on
10.9.2007. It is submitted that the said Directors are the
Directors as per the records of the company however the said
records have not been filed with the Registrar of Companies.
10. It is undertaken on behalf of the petitioner companies that
statutory compliances shall be made and the requisite statutory
records and accounts will be filed with the Registrar of
Companies once the name of the company is restored.
11. In view of the above, the petition is allowed subject to payment
of costs of Rs. 50,000/- and the name of the petitioner company
is restored on the register of the Registrar of companies subject
to the company filing all the statutory documents and returns
for the outstanding period along with the prescribed fees in
accordance with law.
12. Accordingly, upon payment of costs of Rs.50,000/- within a
period of two weeks from today, the name of the petitioner
Company shall stand restored.
13. On receipt of the costs, the Registrar of Companies shall
change the status of the company as "Active". The petitioner
shall thereafter make the necessary statutory compliances and
file the statutory documents with the requisite fee and
additional fee as applicable.
14. The petition is, accordingly, disposed of.
15. A copy of order be given Dasti to the parties.
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
SEPTEMBER 12, 2014
j
