2021 (1) TMI 653 - Tri - Companies Law

Tribunal restores Company's name in Register after compliance show

Vattikonda Hima Bindu and Ors. Versus Yogasai Health Resorts Limited and Ors.

The Tribunal granted the Application for restoration of the Company's name in the Register of Companies under Section 252 of the Companies Act, 2013. The ... Seeking restoration of name of the Company in the Register of Companies - Section 252 of the Companies Act, 2013 - HELD THAT:- After going through the provisions of Section 252 (3) of the Companies Act, 2013, this Tribunal is of the view that the Company was in existence and it is a going concern and name of Company to be restored in the Register of Companies as maintained by RoC. The Registrar of Companies, the 2nd Respondent herein, is ordered to restore the original status of the Applicant/1st Respondent Company as if the name of the company has not been struck off from the Register of Companies and take all consequential actions like change of company's status from 'strike off' to Active (for e-filing), to restore and activate the DINs if applicable, to intimate the bankers about restoration of the name of the company so as to defreeze its accounts - AApplication allowed. Issues:1. Restoration of Company's name in Register of Companies under Section 252 of Companies Act, 2013.Analysis:The Applicants, who are Promoters & Shareholders of a Company, filed an Application seeking restoration of the Company's name in the Register of Companies. The Company was struck off by the Registrar of Companies (RoC) for defaulting in filing Financial Statements and Annual Returns for over two years. The Applicants contended that the Company was operational and intended to file the necessary documents promptly upon restoration. The RoC's report confirmed the default and strike off process. The Tribunal considered the Company's financial position, assets, and compliance history before ordering restoration.The RoC had issued notices and published details regarding the strike off process. The Applicants argued that the Company had conducted meetings, filed income tax returns, and maintained compliance with statutory requirements. They also highlighted the Company's financial position and operational status. The RoC's report emphasized the non-filing of returns since 2016-2017. The Tribunal examined the provisions of Section 252(3) of the Companies Act, 2013 to determine the Company's eligibility for restoration.The Tribunal, after hearing arguments and reviewing documents, concluded that the Company was a going concern and should be restored in the Register of Companies. The Tribunal exercised its powers under Section 252 of the Companies Act, 2013, and issued specific directions for restoration. The RoC was ordered to restore the Company's status, change its classification to active, and notify relevant parties. The Company was directed to file pending documents within a specified timeframe and comply with the order. Additionally, the Company was required to pay a specified cost for revival, deliver a copy of the order to the RoC, and ensure full compliance with the directions.In summary, the Tribunal granted the Application for restoration of the Company's name in the Register of Companies, subject to compliance with specified conditions and payment of costs. The decision was based on the Company's operational status, financial position, and the provisions of the Companies Act, 2013. The Tribunal's order aimed to place the Company and all stakeholders in a position as if the name had not been struck off, while allowing the RoC to take further actions for any other violations committed by the Company.