Restoration of struck-off company name justified where assets, liabilities and filing defaults could be regularised.

A struck-off company's name was restored to the Register of Companies under section 252(3) because it continued to hold assets and liabilities, including land and advances, and restoration would serve a legitimate purpose. The Tribunal also noted that the filing defaults could be regularised by submitting the pending financial statements and annual returns, making refusal to restore an excessive consequence for the omission. The strike-off was therefore set aside, and restoration was ordered subject to filing compliance and costs.

---

---

Issues: Whether the company's name, which had been struck off from the Register of Companies, should be restored under section 252(3) of the Companies Act, 2013.

Analysis: The company demonstrated that it held assets and liabilities, including land and advances, and placed material showing that restoration would serve a legitimate purpose. The record also indicated that the non-filing defaults were capable of being regularised by filing the pending financial statements and annual returns. In these circumstances, the Tribunal treated restoration as a just and proper course and considered refusal to restore to be an excessive consequence for the omission.

Conclusion: The strike-off was set aside and the company's name was directed to be restored in the Register of Companies, with directions to file pending statutory filings and comply with the attendant costs and procedural requirements.

---