SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

DELHI HIGH COURT
PRADEEP NANDRAJOG
Intercrop Industries Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
State of Delhi – Respondent


JUDGMENT

PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J. (Oral)

1. If for no other reason, instant petition must succeed and as a result the order passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate whereunder petitioner has been summoned to face trial in a complaint lodged by the Registrar of Companies under Section 217(5) read with Section 217(3) of the Companies Act 1956 has to be quashed.

2. My reason is simple.

3. Inter alia, in the complaint reference has been made to 6 annexures. The reference to the 6 annexures is not an ideal formality for the reason substantive pleadings in the complaint merely touch upon the annexure and rely thereupon to bring out the true purport, content and meaning of the connected pleadings in the complaint.

4. For example, with reference to an allegation that the company did not give fullest information in the balance sheet, save and except making an averment that full and complete details were not furnished in the balance sheet, to make good the point, it was pleaded that photocopy of the balance sheet with remarks contained thereon is annexed as Annexure-3 to the complaint.

5. I may additionally note that in para 4 of the complaint it has been stated that allegation w

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top