Annapurna Texturisers Private Limited vs The Registrar Of Companies Mumbai

IN THE MATTER OF: Annapurna Texturisers Pvt. Ltd. ...Appellant

Versus

The Registrar of Companies, Mumbai ...Respondents

Present: For Appellant : Adv. Vinit Nagar, PCS Adv. Praveen Tiwari, PCS. For Respondents : Adv. Garima Nagpal for Roc.

ORDER

(Hybrid Mode)

21.11.2025: This appeal is filed against an order dated 01.08.2024

whereby the Appellant applied for restoration of M/s Shree Durga Industrial

Controls Pvt. Ltd. in the capacity of its Equity Shareholder, the name of

which has been struck off on 12.04.2006 on a suo moto application made by

the company before the Registrar of Company, Mumbai, for tagging of its

name under the fast track exit mode under Section 560 of the Companies

Act 1956 on 24.03.2004.

2. It is the submission of the Learned Counsel for the Appellant, the

company holds 61, 972 shares of M/s Baroda Rayon Corporation Limited and

the value of such shares today is 75 Lakhs but when the petition was filed, it was approximately Rs. 1 Crores 40 Lakhs. It is submitted the company holds

substantial property in the form of shares and since the company's name

has not been restored to the register as maintained by Registrar of

Companies, they cannot apply for liquidation of the company so as to get the

benefit of the value of shares so held by the company and hence it is just

and proper the name of the company be restored.

3. We have perused the impugned order. The impact of holding of 61, 972

shares of M/s Baroda Rayon Corporation Limited and its effect has not been

discussed in the impugned order. Further, we find the company's name was

struck off on an application made voluntarily before the Registrar of

Company, Mumbai but the directors of the company were never impleaded

by the Appellant before the Ld. NCLT.

4. Further, an objection is raised by Ms. Garima Nagpal appearing for the

Registrar of Companies, Mumbai the company has not been doing any

business prior to 2004; and the company has failed to maintain proper

accounts.

5. We have noted the contentious raised but we find the factum of the

company holding 61,972 shares of M/s Baroda Rayon Corporation Limited

and its effect qua restoration has not been discussed in the impugned order

and hence we remand the matter to the Ld. NCLT and look into the effect of

holding of such numbers of shares. The Ld. Counsel for the Appellant submit

they shall also take steps to implead the directors of the company before the

Ld. NCLT and that the ROC may raise contentions before the Ld. NCLT. In these circumstances, we set aside the order dated. 01.08.2024 and remand

the matter and dispose of this appeal.

[Justice Yogesh Khanna] Member (Judicial)

[Ajai Das Mehrotra] Member (Technical)

MT/RR