Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(NCLT) 4889
NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL
Smt. Lakshmi Gurung, Member (Judicial), Shri Hariharan Neelakanta Iyer, Member (Technical)
KASHINATH KRISHNA SHINDE – Appellant
Versus
THE REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES, PUNE – Respondent
Company Appeal No. 72/252/MB/2024
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Adv. Omkar V Deosthale, CS Amol Patil
For the Respondents: Present but did not mark attendance
Restoration of a company's name post striking off is justified when compliance issues are rectified and evidence of subscription contributions is presented.
Headnote:(A) Companies Act, 2013 - Sections 252(1) and 10A - Appeal for restoration of company name - The company’s name was struck off for failure to file Form INC 20A within 180 days of incorporation. Appellant provided evidence of subscription payment prior to strike off and undertook future compliance. Court found the restoration just and fair. (Paras 17, 18, 20)
(B) Compliance Requirements - The order mandates the company to comply with statutory requirements and pay costs for restoration. (Paras 18, 19)
Facts of the case:
The appellant seeks restoration of the company’s name which was struck off due to non-filing of required documents within the stipulated time. The shareholders deposited the required subscription amount into the company’s accounts.
Findings of Court:
The court noted that the appeal was filed timely, the company has provided proof of capital contribution, and undertook future compliance. Restoration was deemed just.
Issues: The main issue was whether the failure to file a specific form warranted the company's striking off and if restoration was justified based on subsequent compliance.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that considering the steps taken by the appellant to rectify the past issues, restoring the company’s name was appropriate.
Result: The appeal is allowed, and the company’s name is ordered to be restored to the Register of Companies.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. company's striking off due to non-compliance. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments presented by appellant and respondent. (Para 8 , 11) |
| 3. court's view on restoration. (Para 16 , 17) |
ORDER
1. This appeal has been filed under Section 252 (1) of the Companies Act, 2013 (hereinafter as Act) by Mr. Kashinath Krishna Shinde, a Director and Shareholder of "Silverstone Excavate Private Limited" (hereafter referred to as the Company/Appellant) seeking following prayers:
a. To direct the Registrar of Companies, Pune, to restore the name of the Company in the Register of Companies maintained by it from the date when it was struck off.
b. Pass such further order or orders as the National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai Bench, may deem fit and proper.
Brief facts
2. The name of the company was struck off from the Register for failure to file Form INC 20A within 180 days of its incorporation as required under Section 10A of Companies Act, 2013 .
Submissions from the Appellant:
3. The company was incorporated on 29.10.2020 under the Companies Act, 2013 . Though the subscription amount of Rs. 10,00,000/- was deposited by the shareholders but, the declaration regarding the payment of subscription amount by subscribers to the memorandum was not filed within one hundred and eighty days of its incorporation as required under subsection (1) of Section 10A of the Companies Act, 2013 .
4. The Authorised subscribed, issued and paid up capital Share Capital of the Appellant Company is 10,00,000/- divided into 10,000 Equity shares of Rs. 100- each.
5. The composition of Board of Directors as on the date of strike off and as on the date of filing this application, is as follows:
| S r. No. | Name of Director | Designation |
| 1. | Abdulkalam Kareem Jamadar | Director |
| 2. | Kashinath Krishna Shinde | Director |
6. The main object of the Company is as follows; “To carry on in India or elsewhere the business of prospecting, exploring, operating, and working on mines, quarries and to win, set, crush, smelt, manufacture, process, excavate, dig, break, acquire, develop, exercise, turn into account, survey, produce, prepare, remove, undertake, barter, convert, finish, load, unload, handle, transport, buy, sell, importy, export, supply, and to act as agent, broker, adatia, stockiest, distributor, consultant, contractor, manager, operator or otherwise deal in all sorts of presents and future ores, minerals, deposits, goods and substances and materials, including ……”
7. As the company failed to file form INC 20A, the Registrar of Companies Pune, struck off the name of the company from the register of companies by publishing STK 7 dated 25.10.2022 and also forwarded a copy of the same to the company. The company master data reflects the status of the Company as "Strike Off" as on the date of the filing of this appeal. Copy of STK-1 dated 11.08.2022 & STK-7 dated 25.10.2022 are annexed as Annexure-1 (Colly) to the appeal. Downloaded company master data as on 10.06.2024 is annexed as Annexure-2 to the appeal.
8. The appellant submits that there are two subscribers to the memorandum and after the incorporation of the company the said subscribers have already contributed and deposited the subscription amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- each to the bank account of the company. The company has opened two bank accounts, one with Bank of Baroda, Gadhinglaj and another with ICICI Bank, Gadhinglaj branch. There is one credit entry of Rs. 5,00,000 on 22.12.2020 in the bank account of company maintained with Bank of Baroda. Similarly, there is another credit entry of Rs. 5,00,000/- on 06.01.2021 in the bank account of the company maintained with ICIC bank. It is submitted that the said entries represent the subscription amount deposited by the shareholders towards share capital, which was paid much prior to the issue of STK-7 by ROC. Copies of the Bank statements of both the Banks are annexed as Annexure-4 (Colly) to this appeal.
9. The appellant further submits that as per Section 10A of the Companies Act, 2013 , a
