Section 454(2) independently supports directions to ex-directors to file a statement of affairs during winding up.

Section 454(2) of the Companies Act, 1956 operates independently of section 454(1) and may be invoked by the official liquidator against an ex-director or other qualifying person, even if that person was deleted in earlier proceedings under section 454(5). The Karnataka High Court held that such deletion did not bar a fresh request under the enabling provision, provided the person falls within the statutory category. On the record, the respondent's post-winding-up participation, signing of minutes, and correspondence with the official liquidator supplied sufficient material to justify requiring the statement of affairs.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether an application under section 454(2) of the Companies Act, 1956 is maintainable against a person who had been deleted in an earlier proceeding under section 454(5) of the Act. (ii) Whether sufficient material had been placed on record to justify a direction requiring the respondent to file the statement of affairs.

Issue (i): Whether an application under section 454(2) of the Companies Act, 1956 is maintainable against a person who had been deleted in an earlier proceeding under section 454(5) of the Act.

Analysis: Section 454(1) casts a statutory obligation on the directors and other officers of the company as on the relevant date to submit the statement of affairs, whereas section 454(2) is an enabling provision empowering the official liquidator, with the Tribunal's direction, to require even persons who are or have been officers of the company, including ex-directors, to furnish the statement. The two provisions operate in different fields and are independent of each other. Deletion of the respondent from the earlier proceeding relating to default under section 454(1) did not extinguish the possibility of invoking section 454(2), provided the respondent fell within one of the categories specified therein.

Conclusion: The application under section 454(2) was maintainable against the respondent.

Issue (ii): Whether sufficient material had been placed on record to justify a direction requiring the respondent to file the statement of affairs.

Analysis: The record showed that although the respondent had resigned as director before the winding-up order, he participated in post-winding-up proceedings, signed the minutes relating to taking over of assets, and corresponded with the official liquidator through a representative. This material supported the inference that he remained a person from whom information could be required under section 454(2). The respondent's post-winding-up involvement, together with the pleadings and documents produced, furnished adequate basis for the direction sought by the official liquidator.

Conclusion: Sufficient material had been placed on record to justify the direction against the respondent.

Final Conclusion: The official liquidator's request succeeded, and the respondent was directed to submit the statement of affairs under the statutory scheme governing winding up.

Ratio Decidendi: Section 454(2) is an independent enabling provision that may be invoked against an ex-director or other qualifying person notwithstanding deletion from earlier proceedings under section 454(5), if the official liquidator places sufficient material showing that the person falls within the statutory categories.

---