2010 (9) TMI 1302

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nd November, 1992 vide Certificate of Incorporation No. 55-50826 as a private limited company with the Registrar of Companies, NCT of Delhi and Haryana. 2. The Registrar of Companies, i.e the respondent herein, struck the company's name off the Register due to defaults in statutory compliances, namely, failure to file returns and balance sheets for the financial years 2000-01 to 2005-06. Consequently, the respondent initiated proceedings under S.560 of the Companies Act, 1956, for the purpose of striking the name of the petitioner off the Register maintained by his office. It is stated by counsel for the respondent that the procedure prescribed under S.560 of the Companies Act, 1956 was followed, notices as required under S.560(1), S.560(2....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ndertaking was also given by the petitioner, to the effect that it would file the appropriate documents by the end of May 2007. 5. The returns and the balance sheets for the financial years 2000-2001, 2001-2002, 2002-2003, 2003-2004, 2004- 2005, and 2005-2006 were, in fact, filed by the petitioner on 30th May, 2007. Copies of the challans in G.A.R.7 in this regard, in relation to the respective Form 20B and Form 23AC for the aforesaid financial years, have been annexed to the petition. The respondent's order striking the name of the petitioner off the Register is stated to be of 31st May, 2007, which was thereafter published on 23rd June, 2007 in the Official Gazette, as stated above. 6. The petitioner admits that the company is „no....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... company judge is satisfied that such restoration is necessary in the interests of justice." 9. Looking to the fact that the petition has been filed within the stipulated limitation period, i.e. within 20 years from the date of publication of the notice in the Official Gazette, and to the decision of the Bombay High Court in Purushottamdas & Anr (Bulakidas Mohta Co P. Ltd) v Registrar of Companies (supra), this petition deserves to be allowed. 10. I might notice that Rule 94 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959 states, inter alia, as follows; 'Unless for any special reasons that the Court shall otherwise order, the order shall direct that the petitioners do pay to the Registrar of Companies his costs of, and occasioned by, the petition.'....