IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND WRIT PETITION No.50795/2019(GM-RES)

BETWEEN:

1 . M. KRISHNA REDDY, S/O. M. VENKATA REDDY, AGED 57 YEARS, R/O No.59D, 4^TH A CROSS, 30^TH MAIN, BTM II STAGE, BENGALURU-560076.

...PETITIONER (BY SRI K. V. SATISH, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES, O/O THE REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES, II FLOOR, 'E' WING, KENDRIYA SADANA, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU-560034.

MINISTRY OF CORPORATE AFFAIRS, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA.

2 . ACE FORGE PVT. LTD., A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 AND HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT No.131, 2^ND CROSS, 19^TH MAIN, 6^TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU-560068.

REPT. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.

3 . SRI ARUN BALLAKUR, S/O LATE B. L. N. RAO, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, AND R/O No.295, 19^TH MAIN, 6^TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU-560095.

4 . SMT. MADHAVI BALLAKUR, W/O. SRI. ARUN BALLAKUR, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS AND R/O No.295, 19^TH MAIN, 6^TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU-560095.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SHRIDEVI BHOSALE, ADVOCATE FOR SMT. ANUPAMA HEGDE, ADVOCATE FOR R1;

SRI VIVEK HOLLA, ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO R4)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-1 TO NOTIFY IN ITS OFFICIAL WEBSITE AND IN THE MASTER DATA OF THE R-2 AND OTHER RECORDS MAINTAINED THAT THE R-3 AND 4 HAVE BEEN DISQUALIFIED FROM DIRECTORSHIP OF THE R-2 UNTIL 31.10.2021 AND THAT THEIR DIRECTOR IDENTIFICATION NUMBER ALSO STANDS SUSPENDED TILL SUCH DATE AND ETC.

THIS WRIT PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR ORDERS, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY, THE COURT PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND C.A.V. ORDER Heard Sri K.V.Satish, learned counsel for the petitioner, Smt. Shridevi Bhosale, learned counsel on behalf of Smt. Anupama Hegde, learned counsel for respondent No.1 and Sri Vivek Holla, learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 4.

2. This writ petition has been filed with the prayer to issue directions to respondent No.1 to notify, on its official website and master data, that respondent Nos.3 and 4 stood disqualified from holding the office of Director in respondent No.2-Company until 31.10.2021. Further, the petitioner seeks a direction to respondent No.1 to initiate prosecution against respondent Nos.3 and 4 for unlawfully representing themselves as Directors of respondent No.2-

Company after 01.04.2014.

2.1 The brief facts relevant for consideration of this petition are that, the petitioner is a shareholder and promoter of respondent No.2-Company. Respondent No.2 is a company registered under the Companies Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). Respondent Nos.3 and 4 are directors and were disqualified from the directorship of respondent No.2 under Section 164(2) of the Act for non-filing of the Annual Report comprising of Balance Sheet, Directors and Auditor's Report and also the Annual Return for a consecutive period of three years namely, 2014-15, 2015-16 and 2016-17. It is the case of the petitioner that the moment default is committed for three consecutive financial years, the disqualification is by operation of law under Section 164 of the Act.

3. Sri K.V.Satish, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that respondent Nos.3 and 4 were responsible for the non-filing of financial statements or Annual returns of the company. Respondents Nos.3 and 4 have committed default for a continuous period of three financial years, namely, 2014-15, 2015-16 and 2016-17. It is submitted that under section 164(2)(a), respondent Nos.3 and 4 would suffer disqualification and cannot continue or act as directors of the company. It is further submitted that in view of default, disqualification is statutory and automatic by operation of Section 164(2). Such statutory disqualification is not challenged by respondents Nos.3 and 4 and the same remains.

3.1 Learned counsel further submits that as the disqualification is prior to the ins