1976 (2) TMI 132

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... June 15, 1950, under the Indian Companies Act, 1913. Its registered office is situate at Silver Oaks, Civil Lines, Kanpur. The main object of the company is to carry on the business of exporters, importers, distributors, wholesale and retail dealers, commission agents of textile fabrics of all kinds as also to buy and sell raw cotton, wool, silk, jute, hemp and other raw materials, etc. The share capital of the company was Rs. 33,000. It was held by three persons who were closely related to each other. Two of the shareholders, namely, Moti Chandra and Kailash Nath, were directors of the company. Moti Chandra was the managing director. The company filed a balance-sheet as at October 26, 1962, which disclosed the state of affairs of the comp....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....commit defaults and did not file the balance-sheets for subsequent years, namely, 1966 and 1967. For this offence, they were again prosecuted, convicted and fined by the concerned Magistrate. In spite of these prosecutions and convictions, the company continued its habit of default in filing the balance-sheets for the subsequent years. In fact, no balance-sheet for any of the years subsequent to 1967 has been filed till now. It is apparent that the company and its directors are habitual defaulters and in spite of repeated reminders, they have wilfully failed to file it with the Registrar of Companies. It has been stated in the counter-affidavit that the company was unable to file the balance-sheets because its account books were produced....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....interested or are payable to directors. These firms and directors are not pressing for the repayment of their dues. The same allegations have been reiterated in the counter-affidavit filed to the present petition. It is significant that the company or its directors have not produced any cogent documentary or oral evidence to sustain this plea. In its reply, the managing director stated that Messrs. Roop Narain Ram Chandra (Private) Ltd., to whom the company owed a sum of Rs. 12,23,087.89, have also resolved not to charge any interest on the respondent-company. That shows that Messrs. Roop Narain Ram Chandra (Private) Ltd. have not given up the debt of Rs. 12 lakhs and odd. They have simply given up charging the interest. It is, therefore, n....