Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + Tri Companies Law - 2018 (11) TMI Tri This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (11) TMI 1734 - Tri - Companies LawMaintainability of appeal - appeal preferred by disqualified directors - Striking of the name of the Company from the Register of Companies - Section 252(3) of the Companies Act, 2013 - HELD THAT:- Admittedly the appellant company has defaulted in filing annual returns and financial statements for more than 3 (three) years. Therefore, Section 164(2)(a) of the Companies Act, 2013 attracts in the instant case. The directors have signed the appeal memorandum as well as the affidavits and filed the appeal memorandum as if they are the directors. They are not eligible to sign as the directors as per Section 164(2)(a) of the Companies Act, 2013 - The directors being disqualified u.s 164(2) (a) of the Companies Act, 2013 , they could not maintain an appeal of likenature u/s. 252(3) of the Companies Act, 2013. This view was taken by me in similar appeal also. Moreover, to substantiate the contentions on the side of the appellant that they are also shareholders of the appellant company, I find no supporting proof. There is no pleadings in the appeal memorandum that the shareholders referred to in the Memorandum and Article of Association are subsequently changed by induction of appellants as directors or that they have acquired shares of the appellant company and become shareholders on the date of filing of the appeal memorandum - there are no force in the arguments advanced by the appellants, that the appeal is to be considered on merit as the appellant directors are also shareholders of the appellant company. The appeal preferred by the appellant company represented by its directors is not maintainable as they are disqualified directors on the date of filing of the appeal - Appeal dismissed.
|