https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97790 Petitioners failed to show entitlement under section 353(6) of the Companies Act, 1948 because only those who were company, members or creditors at the date of striking off qualify; post striking off acquisition of shares or debts (especially with knowledge of striking off) does not confer standing. Even assuming standing, restoration is discretionary and requires persuasive evidence that restoring the company will produce substantial benefit to members or creditors; the absence of effective management, destroyed registers, dispersed/outdated shareholder records and foreign bankruptcy proceedings meant no cogent benefit was shown, so restoration was refused. en-us Tue, 21 Feb 1961 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 18 Jan 2012 11:04:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97790 Petitioners failed to show entitlement under section 353(6) of the Companies Act, 1948 because only those who were company, members or creditors at the date of striking off qualify; post striking off acquisition of shares or debts (especially with knowledge of striking off) does not confer standing. Even assuming standing, restoration is discretionary and requires persuasive evidence that restoring the company will produce substantial benefit to members or creditors; the absence of effective management, destroyed registers, dispersed/outdated shareholder records and foreign bankruptcy proceedings meant no cogent benefit was shown, so restoration was refused. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 21 Feb 1961 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97790