2021 (1) TMI 651

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....inter alia seeking that the ROC, Karnataka be directed to revive the Company; with minimum or nil penalty for the delay and to waive off the additional fee payable an account of filing of Annual Returns/Reports with the ROC, Karnataka till FY 2018-19, etc. 2. Brief facts of the case, as mentioned in the Company Petition, which are relevant to the issue in question, are as follows: (1)M/s. Brilliant Fire & Safety Solutions Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as the 'Company') was incorporated on 13.01.2009in the State of Karnataka as a Company limited by shares, vide its CIN: U74999KA2009PTC048859 and having its registered office situated at New Municipal No. 2, Old No. 22, 17thA Main Road, 5th Block, Rajajinagara, Bangalore ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on of MCA 21 portal when action u/s 248(1) of the Companies Act, 2013 (hereinafter as the 'Act') was initiated against the eligible Companies, it was seen that the Petitioner Company has not filed Balance Sheets or the Annual Returns from the year 2016-17 to 2017-18. Therefore, the Respondent had reasonable cause to believe that the Petitioner Company is not carrying on any business or operations and therefore a notice in Form STK-1 dated 28.06.2019 was sent to the Company and its Directors, wherein, it was inter alia mentioned that the Company has not been carrying on any business or operations for two immediately preceding Financial Years nor has filed application u/s 455 of the Companies Act, 2013 and that the Respondent proposes....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Heard Mr. Ravi Kumar TL, learned PCS for the Petitioner. We have carefully perused the pleadings of the parties through Video Conferencing and the extant provisions of the Companies Act, 2013 and the Rules made thereunder. 5. It is not in dispute that the Registrar of Companies is conferred with power U/s. 248(1) to strike off the Company, if the Company has failed to commence its business within one year of its incorporation or a Company is not carrying on any business or operation for a period of two immediately preceding financial years and has not made any Application within such period for obtaining the status of a dormant Company U/s. 455. However, Section 248(6) states that the Registrar of Companies, before finally striking off C....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....conditions. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the interest of justice and fairness would be met if the name of Company is restored as prayed for, however, subject to conditions mentioned below. 7. Hence, by exercising the powers conferred upon this Tribunal, U/s. 252 (3) of the Companies Act, 2013 and following the principle of ease of doing business, C.P. No. 65/BB/2020 is hereby disposed of with the following directions: (1) The Registrar of Companies, Kamataka, the Respondent herein, is ordered to restore the name of the Company in the Register maintained by the Registrar of Companies, Kamataka as if its name had not been struck off from the rolls of the Register, with restoration of all consequential action taken by Regist....