The court determined that a company can be dissolved under Section 481 of the Companies Act when liquidation proceedings cannot continue due to lack of funds.

JUDGMENT

Navin Chawla, J. (Oral)

CO. APPL. NO. 667/2022

1. This application has been filed by the Official Liquidator (in short, `OL') under Section 481 of the Companies Act, 1956 (in short, `the Act'), praying that M/s.Nagrath Paints Pvt. Ltd. [hereinafter referred to as `the Company (In Liqn.)'] be dissolved and the OL be discharged as the Liquidator.

2. It is stated that the OL was appointed as the Provisional Liquidator of the Company (In Liqn.) vide order of this Court dated 19.02.2001; and the Company (In Liqn.) was ordered to be wound up vide order of this Court dated 12.01.2005. Vide the same order, the OL attached to this Court was appointed as the Liquidator of the Company (In Liqn.).

3. It is stated in the said application that the possession of the Registered Office of the Company (In Liqn.) at 2, Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi, could not be taken as the landlord informed that the Company (In Liqn.) had shifted from the said premises in the year 1978-1979.

4. The factory of the Company (In Liqn.) at 46, Fazal Gunj, Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh was taken over on 18.06.2001. The land and building and plant and machinery of the factory of the Company (In Liqn.) at 46, Fazal Gunj, Kanpur, UP, was auctioned pursuant to the order of this Court dated 09.02.2012 for Rs.8,75,00,000/- (Rupees Eight Crore Seventy Five Lakh Only), to M/s. Bajaj Fabcon Pvt. Ltd..

5. The following persons were the ex-directors of the Company (In Liqn.) and the details with respect to the filing of the Statement of Affairs and recording of their statement under Rule 130 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959 is reproduced herein below:

6. As the Statement of Affairs under Section 454 of the Act by the ex-directors of the Company (In Liqn.) [with some not even recording their statement under Rule 130 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959] was not filed, the OL filed a criminal complaint, being CRL.O.No. 11/2004, and an application, being CA No.485/2014, under Sections 468 and 477 of the Act against the ex-directors of the Company (In Liqn.). Subsequently, and as recorded hereinabove, five ex-directors of the Company (In Liqn.) were declared to be `proclaimed offenders'; one was deleted from the array of parties and one ex-director, namely, Mr. Ranjit Nagrath left for his heavenly abode during the pendency of the present petition. The said criminal complaint was disposed of vide order of this Court dated 18.12.2012.

7. That the claims from the creditors of the Company (In Liqn.) were invited, pursuant to the order of this Court dated 17.05.2012, by publishing the notice in the newspapers, namely, `Statesman' (English) Delhi Edition and `Dainik Jagran' (Hindi) Kanpur Edition. Pursuant thereto, one claim from the Employees' Provident Fund Organisation (in short, `EPFO'), one claim from a secured creditor, one hundred-fifteen claims from the workmen, and two claims from unsecured creditors were received.

8. That the claims of the creditors were scrutinised and thereafter, disbursed by the OL, as explained in form of a table as under: