IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
N. NAGARESH, J.
KFPC Nidhi Limited, Represented By Its Director & Ors. - Petitioners
Versus
Union of India, Represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Corporate Affairs & Ors. - Respondents
WP(C) Nos.21449 and 21529 of 2023
Decided On : 21-05-20257
JUDGMENT :
When these cases were taken up, the counsel for the petitioners submitted that the issue is covered by the judgment in W.P.(C).No.38860/2023 & connected cases and the same directions may be issued in this case also. The directions in the said judgment read as under:-
(a) The challenge to the amendments to Section 406 of the Companies Act, 2013, as also to the “Nidhi Rules, 2014” - as impelled in these writ petitions - are left undecided and kept open for future consideration, if it becomes so warranted.
(b) Each of the petitioners in these cases will be at liberty to approach the competent Authority, for compounding the offences alleged against them; and if such are made within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, they shall be considered by the said Authority with the maximum empathy requisite; thus leading to the imposition of the least sum of penalty, as permissible in law – however, subject to the evaluation and determination of such, on a case-to-case basis by the competent Authority. But, these protections will not apply in a case where criminality is suspected, or found, or in which action under the criminal law is initiated or proposed; in which event, the respective petitioners will be informed to the same appositely.
(c) On the offences committed by the petitioner - Nidhi Companies, if any, being compounded in terms of the afore directions, they will be at liberty to apply afresh, in the format prescribed as per the “NDH Form”; and if this is done, it will be considered dispassionately and without being trammeled or influenced by the earlier rejections, and dehors the orders qua the same; and appropriate new orders and necessary action issued and completed thereon, without any avoidable delay, but not later than three months from the date of the receipt of the application.
(d) If, on the contrary, the competent Authority is to find any objection with the applications of the petitioner - “Nidhi Companies” under the “NDH” Format, they shall not reject it peremptorily, but will notify each of them appropriately through apposite proceedings, intimating them of such and giving them a minimum of one month to rectify the same, to be then resubmitted as per law. Should there be any further defects still found to be subsisting, the Authority will then hear the respective applicants and give them such necessary further time as may be fixed, to rectify them, before taking a final decision.
(e) The competent Authorities will permit the petitioners to raise their capital within the threshold limit as per the Statutory requirement; for which purpose, all applications and requirements for such will be acceded to, subject to other mandatory requirements being satisfied. Needless to say, if the petitioners require any clarifications in future, on the working of the afore directions, they will be at liberty to approach this Court through appropriate applications.”
Being in respectful agreement with the directions extracted above, the writ petitions are disposed of by making the directions in W.P.(C).No.38860/2023 & connected cases applicable to these cases also.
Petitioners may seek compounding of offences under specified conditions, facilitating a process for rectification and fair consideration by authorities.
The judgment emphasizes the need for the competent authority to consider applications generously while ensuring compliance with statutory requirements.
Judicial review is permissible where administrative agencies fail to follow procedural fairness; petitioners have rights for due process in application handling.
The court upheld that reasonable restrictions are permissible, allowing petitioners to compound offenses and raising capital within statutory limits while leaving challenges to amendments undecided f....
Amendments to regulations governing Nidhi Companies must adhere to principles of procedural fairness and timely decision-making; delays in processing applications violate natural justice.
The court upheld the necessity of reasonable regulation for Nidhi Companies while allowing them to challenge amendments to the Companies Act and Nidhi Rules in the future.
The judgment emphasizes the need for reasonable regulatory mechanisms for Nidhi Companies and allows the petitioners to apply for compounding of offences and make fresh applications under the Nidhi R....
The judgment clarifies procedural directions and constitutional interpretations regarding Nidhi Companies under specified rules.
The court directed the respondents to allow the petitioner to fulfill statutory compliance requirements under the Companies Act, following the principles established in previous similar judgments, ra....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.