Successful Appeal Restoring Company Name Struck Off for Non-Compliance

The appeal for restoration of a company's name, struck off by the Registrar of Companies for non-compliance, was successful. The Tribunal found just and equitable grounds for restoration, considering the company's assets and activities. The appellant was directed to file necessary documents, pay fees, and bear revival costs. The restoration was deemed appropriate to rectify oversights and benefit stakeholders.

---

---

Issues involved:
1. Restoration of name of a company struck off by Registrar of Companies.
2. Compliance with statutory requirements under the Companies Act, 2013.
3. Just and equitable grounds for restoration of the company's name.
4. Payment of costs and fees for revival of the company.

Issue 1: Restoration of name of a company struck off by Registrar of Companies:
The appeal was filed for restoration of the name of a company that was struck off by the Registrar of Companies, Uttar Pradesh, due to default in statutory compliances. The company had been active since its incorporation and maintained financial accounts but failed to file necessary documents with the Registrar within the prescribed time. The appellant argued that the company had assets and was carrying on business activities, justifying the restoration of its name in the records of the Registrar of Companies.

Issue 2: Compliance with statutory requirements under the Companies Act, 2013:
The Registrar of Companies stated that the company was dissolved after providing reasonable opportunity for compliance and no response was received to the show cause notice. The appellant acknowledged the failure to file annual returns and balance sheets but attributed it to various reasons such as adverse market conditions and financial issues. The Tribunal considered the documents presented by the appellant, which demonstrated the company's financial position and assets, indicating that it was a functioning entity.

Issue 3: Just and equitable grounds for restoration of the company's name:
The Tribunal examined the relevant provisions under Section 252 of the Companies Act, 2013, and found that restoration of the company's name would be in the interest of the company, its shareholders, and creditors. It was noted that the company had assets warranting restoration and that denying restoration solely based on failure to file annual returns would be excessive. The Tribunal emphasized the need for an opportunity to rectify oversights and deemed restoration appropriate in this case.

Issue 4: Payment of costs and fees for revival of the company:
The Tribunal ordered the restoration of the company's name, directing the appellant to file all statutory documents with prescribed fees within thirty days of restoration. A cost of Rs. 50,000 was imposed for revival, to be paid online. The appellant was instructed to deliver a certified copy of the order to the Registrar of Companies and publish notices in newspapers and the Official Gazette regarding the restoration of the company, with expenses to be borne by the appellant.

In conclusion, the appeal was disposed of with the restoration of the company's name subject to compliance with the specified directions and payment of costs, emphasizing the just and equitable grounds for restoration based on the company's assets and circumstances.

---