TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (9) TMI 1082
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ted on 28-7-1992 with the Registrar of Companies, Jaipur Rajasthan (Registration certificate No.06856) with its registered office at 15, Diggi House Shivaji Marg, Jaipur was wound up by this Court vide order dated 17-10-2003 in S.B. Company Petition No.31/1998 on a petition filed by M/s. Anand Printco, Jaipur. The company in liquidation was a non-banking Finance Company for carrying out the business of finance and leasing. It accepted deposits from the members, floated various schemes and made advances and loans under hire purchase housing finance scheme to the depositors. The company in liquidation had an authorised share capital of Rs. 15,00,000/- divided into Rs. 1,50,000/- equity share of Rs. 10/- each and issue subscribed and paid u....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... by the company in liquidation in fixed deposit with the State Bank of India, Sirohi, Bikaner, Ahore, Kolayat and Jaipur Branches. However the official liquidator did not receive the said amount and it appeared that the respondent directors had privately realised the said FDR amount Rs. 19,95,243/-. It was further found that as per balance sheet all advances were "good for recovery", therefore, it could be presumed that the entire amount due from loan and advances were realised outside the books of the company. It was further found that Rs. 7,00,570/- were cash in hand and Rs. 25,81,627/- were in bank aggregating to Rs. 32,82,198/- which had not been hand over to the official liquidator. Neither the statement of affairs nor account books no....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....96. Nor the annual return was filed after 30-9-1996. The respondent directors also did not file statement of affairs as required under Section 454 of the Act of 1956. The directors as per the last balance sheet of 31-3-1996 had collected deposits of Rs. 1,35,94,826/- under various deposit schemes and did not repay the same. While the capital base of the company in liquidation was only Rs. 2,10,000/-. Thus the respondent directors of the company in liquidation deliberately caused financial loss. The Chartered Accountant found the following amounts of the company recoverable:- 1. Fixed assets (including vehicle) Rs. 3,66,699/- 2. Investments Rs.19,95,243/- 3. Cash & Bank Balance Rs.32,82,198/- 4. Loans and Adv....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... examined as Pw.2. He supported his report and the allegations levelled against the respondent directors. No defence has emanated from the respondents. It has been prayed that in the circumstances, that the application under section 543 of the Act of 1956 filed by the Official Liquidator be allowed. Heard. Considered. As far as the issue of non filing of statutory returns by the respondent directors qua affairs of the company is concerned, I am of the considered view that the case in that regard against the respondent directors is made out and they are guilty of non filing of statutory returns. A wholistic reading of the uncontroverted evidence on record clearly indicates that the directors not only acted against the interest of th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....they are found liable for misapplication etc. of the money or property of the company or otherwise guilty of any misfeasance or breach of trust in relation to the company. In the case of Official Liquidator Dhavalgiri Paper Mills (P) Ltd. Vs. Chinubhai Khilachand [2003 (114) Com Cases 277] the Gujarat High Court held that to bring the charge of misfeasance against ex-directors it is necessary that specific acts of commission or omission and/ or negligence on the part of the directors should be pointed out and proved establishing that the act of commission or omission or negligence was with the knowledge and intent to cause loss to the company. In the case of Official Liquidator Vs. D.D. Sinha [SB Company Application No.5/1995 decided by the....