9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (10) TMI 127X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... TE LIMITED (hereinafter called as the 'Appellant Company'), represented by Mr. Bijosh Paul, Managing Director of the appellant company, seeking a direction to the Registrar of Companies, Kochi (hereinafter called as the 'ROC') to restore the name of the Company in the Register of Companies, maintained by the Registrar of Companies, Kochi, for the State of Kerala and Lakshadweep. The appellant company is a private company limited by shares incorporated on 27.11.2012 under the Companies Act, 1956. The Corporate Identification Number (CIN) of the Company is U72200KL2012PTC032762 having its Registered Office at #B1, Springs Cascade Building, Peringatt Road, Palarivattom, Ernakulam- 682 025. 2. As per the Memorandum of Association, the main bus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... panies Act,2013 for a period of five years starting from 01/11/2017 to 31/10/2022 and the DIN numbers are deactivated preventing them from filing of accounts and returns. The filing of pending accounts and returns requires a temporary lifting of the deactivation of DIN numbers of both directors. The Managing Director, the Appellant Company, who filed this appeal has also filed an Affidavit on 10.09.2020. 4. The appellant further undertook that he is ready and willing to file the pending returns along with the filing fees and additional fees, as applicable on the date of actual filing on receipt of Restoration Order from this Tribunal and prayed for a direction to RoC for restoring the name of the Company in the Register of Companies, maint ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) Rules, 2016, Form STK-5 was published in Official Gazette on 28.07.2018 and newspaper publication in the Form STK- 5A was made in English & Malayalam dailies on 23.06.2018 and 24.06.2018 respectively. Finally, the Company was struck off on 29.09.2018 under Section 248(5) and the same was published in Form STK -7 in official Gazette dated 17.09.2018. 7. Circumstances being above, the ROC submitted that the action of striking off of the name of the Company was triggered due to negligence and lack of due diligence on the part of the directors of the Company for not discharging their statutory duties in filing the statutory returns within the due date stipulated under the Companies Act and also for not responding to the several periodical no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... directions and make such provisions as deemed just for placing the company and all other persons in the same position as nearly as may be as if the name of the company had not been struck off from the register of companies 10. Having satisfied with the reasons as mentioned in the appeal and in the light of above cited provisions of Companies Act, 2013, the Tribunal is of the opinion that it would be just and equitable to order restoration of the name of the Company in the Register of Companies and that the shareholder of the Company is competent to file this appeal. Hence this Tribunal pass the following order: - (i) The Registrar of Companies, the respondent herein, is ordered to restore the original status of the Appellant Company as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
