A Venture Realtors Pvt. Ltd vs Registrar Of Companies, Pune
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) No. 319 of 2018
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The imposition of a further cost for a default in respect of which the company has already paid the penal amount prescribed under the Companies Act, 2013 is not justified; a company that has discharged the statutory penalty for a default cannot be subjected to additional cost for the same default.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
M/s. A. Venture Realtors Pvt. Ltd. ...Appellant
Versus
Registrar of Companies, Pune ...Respondent
Present:
For Appellant : Mr. Mustafa Ahmad Khan and Mr. Dhaval Deshpande, Advocates
For 1st Respondent: Mr. P.S. Khade, Assistant Registrar,
ORDER
08.10.2018 This appeal has been preferred by the appellant against the
order dated 30th July, 2018 so far it relates to imposition of cost of Rs. 7,50,000/-
imposed on the appellant for restoring its name.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the
National Company Law Tribunal Mumbai Bench by allowing the application
under Section 252 of the Companies Act restored the name of the Company "A
Venture Realtors Pvt. Ltd." in the Register of the Registrar of Companies, Pune
but without any reason imposed cost of Rs. 7,50,000/-.
On Notice, Mr. P.S. Khade, Assistant Registrar appears and submits that
because of default a cost of Rs. 7,50,00/- has been imposed by the Tribunal.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that they have already
deposited Rs.2,84,000/- with the Registrar of Companies towards penal amount
of fine as per the provision of the Companies Act, 2013. Therefore, for default
no additional cost can be imposed.
- 2-
Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case we find
that the appellant having already paid the penal amount of Rs. 2,84,000/- under
the provisions of the Companies Act, there was no occasion to impose any further
cost for same default, we accordingly set aside the order dated 30th July, 2018
so far it relates to imposition of cost of Rs. 7,50,000/- as also the observations
and directions made against the company The appeal is allowed in part. The
impugned order stands modified to the extent above. No cost
[Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya] Chairperson
[ Justice Bansi Lal Bhat ] Member (Judicial)
/ns/gc/
Company Appeal (AT) No. 319 of 2018
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free