2019 (12) TMI 1431

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d the website of the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, New Delhi disqualifying the Petitioners to hold the Office of the Directorship of a Company under section 164 (2) (a) of the Companies Act 2013, which came into effect from 1-4-2014, is challenged with the consequential direction to the Respondents to permit the Petitioner to get re-appointed or appointed as Directors in any other Company without any hindrance. 3. The lists dated 8-9-2017 and 1-11-2017 published by the Registrar of Companies, Tamil Nadu, Chennai were the subject matter of challenge before this Court in a batch of cases in W.P. No. 25455 of 2017 etc. batch [(2018) 6 MLJ 704] and came to be disposed by this Court by order dated 3-8-2018, the operative portion of which is ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....l return under section 92(4) of 2013 Act is sixty days from Annual General Meeting or the last date on which Annual General Meeting ought to have been held, hence, the time limit to file balance sheet under section 137(1) of the 2013 Act is again thirty days from Annual General Meering. Therefore, in view of these legal position, the disqualification could get triggered off only on or after 30-10-2017 only, if any company fails to file annual forms for three financial years. Importantly, it is to be borne in mind that even beyond that time limit, additional time limit of 270 days was available by virtue of the then first proviso to Section 403. (d) Although there is no statute or provision expressly spelling out the observance of t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....orized by the Central Government. (f) In view of the above legal position, when the default in filing the accounts or returns are made as compoundable offence, Section 164(2)(a) providing the disqualification of director of private company not only in the defaulting company, but also from other company in which the petitioner is a director, diligently and meticulously following every provision of law, is certainly disproportionate to the lapse, as it is only regulatory in nature, because, notice to be sent under section 248(1) of the Companies Act, 2013 by the Registrar of Companies for striking off the name of the company from the Registrar of Companies on the premise that the company has not been carrying on any business for a pe....