TMI Blog2012 (4) TMI 445X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd they had reasonable cause for the delay in filing the statement of affairs – against Official Liquidator. - COMPANY APPLICATION NO. 2001 OF 2000, COMPANY PETITION NOS. 143 OF 1997 & 68 OF 1999 - - - Dated:- 28-3-2012 - A. S. BOPANNA, J. K.S. Mahadevan and V. Jayaram for the Applicant. Ms. M.L. Anushree Jois for the Respondent. ORDER 1. The instant application is filed by the Official Liquidator alleging that the erstwhile Directors of the respondent company have not filed the Statement of Affairs as contemplated in law and as such, action is liable to be initiated as contemplated under section 454(5) and (5A) of the Companies Act. 2. The respondents have appeared and put forth their explanation by way of defence ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Statement of Affairs has been filed subsequent to the time which is provided in law. However, the question for consideration is as to whether there is reasonable cause for the delay which has occurred and in that circumstance, whether the case put forth by the respondents could be accepted. In that regard, the undisputed fact is that the possession of the assets including the immovable property including building belonging to the Company in liquidation was taken over jointly by the Official Liquidator, Karnataka State Financial Corporation and Indian Overseas Bank on 24-7-2000. The mahazar for taking over possession of the premises is produced by the respondents and marked as Ex. R. 1. Though the said date is after the initial date of 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... jurisdictional police has also filed 'C' report indicating that no further progress could be made and no recoveries have been made during the process of investigation. This aspect of the matter would indicate that in view of the change in circumstance which had occurred due to the sealing of the premises and theft thereafter which had also occurred in the year 2000 itself, the respondents were not in a position to immediately file the Statement of Affairs. 7. In the above background, the question that would arise is as to how on the subsequent date the Statement of Affairs was filed i.e. , on 10.01.2005. To explain the manner in. which the Statement of Affairs was filed, the respondents have relied on the correspondences which had bee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xplaining the delay, in the instant facts, the fact that possession was taken over on 24-7-2000 and a theft had occurred in the premises on 17-10-2000 and the respondents had thereafter made efforts to approach the office of the Official Liquidator to secure the details from the records is evident. Such permission was granted on 16.02.2004 and on the examination of the available records, the Statement of Affairs was filed on 10.01.2005. All this would indicate that the action of the respondents was not deliberate and they had reasonable cause for the delay in filing the statement of affairs and the same had been explained. In that view of the matter, I am of the opinion that the respondents are entitled to be exonerated. Accordingly, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
