Director's Application Restores Company Name Despite Revenue Lapse

The Tribunal allowed the director/shareholder's application for restoration of a struck-off company's name under Section 252(3) of the Companies Act, 2013. Despite the company's lack of revenue during defaulting years, evidence of valuable assets led to the restoration order. The Tribunal directed the Registrar to restore the company's name, with compliance requirements and emphasized the importance of timely statutory filings for maintaining active status under the Companies Act, 2013.

---

---

Issues Involved:
Application under Section 252(3) of the Companies Act, 2013 for restoration of a struck-off company's name by a director/shareholder.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Background and Application:
The application was filed under Section 252(3) of the Companies Act, 2013 by a director/shareholder of a struck-off company, seeking the revocation of the order issued by the Registrar of Companies, Odisha. The company, M/s. NABADURGA BUILDERS PRIVATE LIMITED, was struck off for non-filing of statutory returns since the financial year ending in 2014.

2. Company Details and Management:
The company was a private limited company with a specific business objective related to construction and development. It had authorized and paid-up share capital, managed by two directors, including the applicant, before being struck off.

3. Registrar's Action and Applicant's Claims:
The Registrar of Companies, Odisha, initiated the striking-off process due to the company's failure to file financial statements and annual returns. The applicant claimed that financial statements were prepared on time but not filed due to inadvertence by the directors.

4. Evidence Presented:
The applicant submitted various evidence, including the company's Memorandum and Articles of Association, balance sheets, audit reports, and bank statements, to support the claim for restoration.

5. Registrar's Response:
The Registrar justified the striking off, stating the company's non-compliance with statutory returns and lack of response to notices. The Registrar emphasized the need for strict proof that the company was in operation at the time of striking off.

6. Tribunal's Decision:
After reviewing the records and hearing the arguments, the Tribunal noted that the company had not generated revenue during the defaulting years. However, the applicant presented evidence of land purchase, indicating valuable assets. The Tribunal decided to allow the application and directed the Registrar to restore the company's name.

7. Order for Restoration and Compliance:
The Tribunal's order included directions for the restoration of the company's name, filing of pending statutory documents, payment of costs, and compliance within specified timelines. The order also emphasized that it was confined to the specific violations leading to striking off and did not preclude further actions for other offenses.

8. Conclusion:
The Tribunal's detailed order granted the restoration of the company's name based on the evidence presented and the circumstances of the case, highlighting the importance of compliance and timely filing of statutory documents to maintain active status under the Companies Act, 2013.

---