Back
RAJASEKHAR MANTHA
Satya Narayan Banik – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT
ORDER
Rajasekhar Mantha, J. - The writ petitioners are aggrieved by cessation of office as directors of one M/s. Hahnemann International Pvt. Ltd. The disqualification happened by operation of Section 164 (2) for not filing balance sheets and annual returns for a continuous period of three years from the year 2014-15. The ROC has also deactivated the Director Identification Number of the petitioners for which the petitioners are aggrieved by. The petitioners have advanced a three-fold argument challenging such disqualification.
(i) That they were not permitted to avail the benefit of the "Company's Fresh Start Scheme of 2020" despite applying by letter dated 11th November, 2020.
(ii) That the petitioners were not afforded a prior hearing before the disqualification as a directors and were hence denied principles of Natural Justice.
(iii) The Registrar of Companies is not authorized to deactivate their Director Identification Numbers (DIN) of the and that such activation of DIN pursuant to the disqualification is not automatic.
2. A large number of decisions have been cited by Mr. Rajarshi Dutta, Learned counsel for the petitioner, Viz. M. K. Meethelaveetil Kaitheri Muralidharan
The disqualification of directors under Section 164 (2) and 167 (1)(a) is automatic and does not require prior notice or hearing. The court upheld the constitutional validity of the relevant sections....
The disqualification of directors under Section 164 (2) and 167 (l)(a) of the Companies Act, 2013 is automatic and does not require prior notice or hearing. The deactivation of Director Identificatio....
The operation of the 2014 Amendment to Section 164(2) and the 2018 Amendment to the proviso of Section 167(1)(a) of the Companies Act, 2013 are prospective in nature.
Important points:Directors of the Yogam took any effective steps to file annual returns/financial statements during the period from 2013-14 to 2015-16-Disqualification under Section 164(2) is by oper....
: AQD Rules do not empower the ROC to deactivate the DIN, Court find that such deactivation would also be contrary to Section 164(2) read with 167(1) of CA 2013 inasmuch as the person concerned would....
The court emphasized the importance of affording an opportunity to the petitioner before passing a disqualification order and interpreted the relevant provisions of the Companies Act, 2013 and the Ru....
Disqualification of directors under Section 164(2)(a) of the Companies Act, 2013 should be in accordance with procedural requirements and afford the directors an opportunity to be heard.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
