2022 (10) TMI 67

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....der Section 560(5) of the Companies Act, 1956(hereinafter being referred to as the "Act 1956"). 2. The brief facts of the case are as under: The initial incorporation of the Company was in the name of Basanti Cotton Mills Private Limited with three Directors, namely, (i)Gopal N. Dave, (ii) Nikhil Basant Lal Merchant, (iii) Paresh Basant Lal Merchant and the authorized share capital of the Company was Rs.10,00,000/divided into 1,00,000 equity shares of Rs.10 each. The name of the Basanti Cotton Mills Private Limited was changed to Basanti Cotton Mills(1998) Private Limited on 3rd March, 2000. The last annual return and audited accounts were filed with the Registrar of Companies for the financial year 2002-2003. The name of the Company ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nexure - D 17.11.2008 One Form NO. 18 filed under the signature of Narendranath Kar showing the change of Registered Office of the company from B.T. Road Panihati to 109, F, 139F and 137 F.B.T. Road, Panihati w.e.f. 10.10.2008. As per Annexure - E 10.10.2009 05.11.2009DIN No. 3 in respect of Dipali Chowdhury and Babulal Banerjee filed under MCA online filing system under the signature of Nirendranath Kar. As per Annexure - F N.B. 1) In this regard it may kindly be pointed out that though DIN NO. 3 in respect of Nirendranath Kar, Dipali Chowdhury and Babulal Banerjee has been filed online under the Digital signature of Nirendranath Kar, however no Form 32 has been filed showing the appointment of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rder dated 22nd March, 2011 and the matter was remitted back to the learned Single Judge to determine the issue afresh in accordance with law. 6. The Company Judge, by judgment and order dated 8th August, 2012, allowed the application and restored the name of the company and that again became the subject matter of challenge in appeal before the High Court which came to be decided by the judgment impugned dated 17th October, 2012 holding that the appellant has no locus standi as he is neither a Company nor a member nor creditor hence he cannot be said to be a person aggrieved to question the order of the Registrar in striking off the name of the Company from the register of RoC as referred to under Section 560(5) of the Act 1956. The extr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ompany in question was Rs.7,000/and if that is being taken at the face value which is supported by documentary evidence on record, as per the scheme of Section 3 of the Act 1956, the Company is deemed to be a defunct company. 8. Learned counsel for the appellant has taken us to the additional documents which he has filed in support of his submission, although it is informed that such documents were not available before the High Court when the proceedings were initiated/instituted by the appellant. That apart, the document produced by the appellant including the DIN forms obtained in September/October 2008, much after name of the Company was struck off in the year 2006 and even Form 32 which has now been placed on record by the appellant ....