Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether a company is criminally liable under section 87(2) and section 87(4) of the Indian Companies Act for failing to notify the Registrar of a change in a director's other directorships within fourteen days, even where no officer of the company is shown to have had knowledge of the change.
Analysis: Section 87(2) imposes on the company a duty to send a prescribed notification to the Registrar of any change among its directors or in particulars contained in the register, within the specified period. Section 87(4) prescribes penalty for default and makes the company liable for every default; the qualifying words "who is knowingly and wilfully in default" refer to officers of the company and not to the company itself. The statutory scheme does not distinguish between facts apparent from the company's records and facts only known to the director; the company must take steps to remain aware of changes it is required to notify. Requiring proof of knowledge or wilful default on the part of the company would defeat the enforcement of the statutory duty and encourage neglect in maintaining registers.
Conclusion: The acquittal of the company is set aside. The company is convicted for failing to notify the Registrar as required by section 87(2) and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 25.