NCLT JUDGEMENT ON SECTION 248, 252, 252(3), 455(1) OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013


Maheshkumar Narvarlal Patel Vs. Registrar Of Companies, (2020) 08 NCLT CK 0022

NCLT allowed appeal filed by the Appellant U/s 252(3) of the Companies Act, 2013 for restoration of name of the Appellant Company struck off by the Registrar of Companies, Ahmedabad U/s 248 of the Companies Act, 2013 read with Companies (Removal of Names of Companies from the Register of Companies) Rules, 2016, from the Register of Companies maintained by the Registrar of Companies, Uttar Pradesh. While allowing the appeal NCLT held that the Company is no doubt having liabilities as well as assets in its balance sheet. Its also owing land which has got substantial value and disposal of the same cannot be done unless the company is revived. Thus, in our view the name of the company can be restored in the Register of Companies maintained by ROC, Ahmedabad from the date of its striking off. However, for noncompliance of provisions of Companies Act, 2013 relating to non-filing of statutory returns without plausible explanation, suitable cost needs to be imposed. Accordingly, the name of the Company is restored on payment of costs as stated in the order.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

NCLT JUDGEMENT ON SECTION 8, 9, 13(1)(B), 13(1)(C), 14, 14(1), 15, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 31(1), 33 OF THE INSOLVENCY AND BANKRUPTCY CODE, 2016

NCLT JUDGEMENT ON SECTION 133, 230, 231, 232 OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013 AND RULE 3, 3(2) OF THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL RULES, 2016

NCLT JUDGEMENT ON SECTION 8, 8(1), 8(2), 9, 9(5)(1), 14, 15,16, 17, 18, 20, 21, 31(1), 33 OF THE INSOLVENCY AND BANKRUPTCY CODE, 2016