2013 (3) TMI 165

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... BY SRI.T.P.M. IBRAHIM KHAN,ASST.SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. JASMINE V.H. ORDER   The three former directors of the Company M/s. Teak Tex Processing Complex Ltd., P.B. No: 501, Kanjikode, Palakkad, have filed these petitions to quash the complaint filed by the respondent under various provisions of the Companies Act.   2. Complaints were filed by the Ass....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....anies (Appointment and Qualification of Secretary) Rules 1988. 3. In S.T. 130/2006, which is the subject matter of Crl.M.C. No:1287/2007, the allegation is that the 1st accused Company was bound to file with the complainant, three copies of the Balance Sheet as at and the Profit and Loss account for the period ended 31.03.2004 as required under section 220 (1) and 220 (2) of the Companies Act. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....such statement/Annual Return relating to the said year. Thus, it is contended that the petitioners are liable to be punished for offence under section 159 r/w 162 of the Act.   5. Crl.M.C. No:1288/2007 was filed, where the allegation is that the petitioners have violated the provisions of section 269 of the Companies Act and so they are liable to be punished under section 629-A of the C....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....strar of Companies and when the petitioners came to know that Form No:32 was not submitted by the Company Secretary, they moved the Company Law Board, Chennai. By that time, as per the proceedings of this Court, the Company was wound up and so the petition filed before the Company Law Board was dismissed as withdrawn and thereafter the petitioners moved this Court. Annexure A5 Order was passed by ....