Miss Lucy
← All judgments

M/S Precious Energy Services Ltd & Ors vs Registrar Of Companies, Nct Of Delhi & ...

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal18 June 2017

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

The Tribunal may, under Rule 11 read with Rule 31 of the NCLAT Rules 2016, recall and correct its own order where there is an error apparent on the face of the record, including clerical or typographical errors in the fines imposed under the Companies Act, 1956, and may substitute corrected operative paragraphs in place of the erroneous ones.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHII.A.No. 337 of 2017inCompany Appeal (AT) No. 106 of 2017IN THE MATTER OF:

Sapphire Industrial Infrastructures Pvt Ltd ...Appellants

Vs

Registrar of Companies, NCT of Delhi & Haryana. ...Respondents

Alongwith I.A.No. 338 of 2017 in Company Appeal (AT) No. 107/2017

M/s Precious Energy Services Ltd & Ors. ...Appellants

Vs

Registrar of Companies, NCT of Delhi & Haryana. ...Respondents

Present: Ms. Varsha Banerjee, Advocate with Mr. Milan Singh Negi and Mr. Kunal Godwani, Advocates for the Appellants. Mr. Ripu D Bhardwaj with Mr. T.P. Singh, Advocate for ROC.

ORDER

18.07.20 17 These applications under Rule 11 r/w Rule 31 of the

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Rules 2016 have been preferred by

appellants pointing out the clerical/ typographical errors as taken place in the

common order dated 30th May 2017 passed by this Appellate Tribunal in these

appeals.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants submits that the

company never violated Section 149 of the Companies Act, 1956, nor any

prayer was made for compounding of offence under Section 149 in Company

Petitions No. 16/10/2017 out of which Company Appeal(AT) No. 106 of 2017 arises. However, by the order dated 30th May 2017, fine have been imposed,

for offence punishable under Section 149 of the Companies act, 1956.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants further submits

that there was a violation of Section 178 of the Companies Act,- 1956, for

which the application for compounding was filed in the Company Petition No.

16/10/2017 giving rise to Company Appeal (AT) No. 106 of 2017. But by

order dated 30th May 2017, for alleged violation of Section 177, a fine of

Rupees 1,50,000/- (Rs. One Lakh Fifty Thousand only) has been imposed on

the three Directors, apart from the company. It is stated that the company

has not committed any offence and the violation of Section 178, relate to one

Director and three Officers i.e. total four officers.

Similarly, in paragraph no. 19, which related to C. P. No. 16/09/2017

out of which Company Appeal (AT) No. 107 of 2017 arises, for violation of

Section 177, a fine of Rs. 1,50,000/- (Rs. One Lac Fifty Thousand only) has

been imposed on the company and three Directors though the maximum

penalty prescribed is Rs. One Lakh.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Registrar of Companies

accepts the aforesaid typographical error, and submitted that such error has

occurred due to mistake committed by Tribunal while passing the impugned

judgement.

It is also submitted that the paragraph 20 of the common order of the

judgement dated 30th May 2017, the number of Company Petitions have not

been properly shown.

Having heard the parties and taking into consideration the aforesaid

facts, and in view of the fact that there is an error apparent in the face of the 3

order dated 30th May 2017, in exercise of power conferred by Rule 11 read

with Rule 31 of the NCLAT Rules, while we recall the paragraph nos. 18, 19

and 20 of the order dated 30th May 2017 passed in Company Appeal(AT)No.

106 of 2017 with Company Appeal (AT) No. 107 of 2017, substitute the

following order in place of paragraphs 18, 19 and 20 of the original order: -

"18. In view of the discussion as made above we

pass the following order in Company Appeal (AT) No.

106 of 2017.

For violation of Section 178(1) of the Companies

Act 1956, we impose a fine of Rs. 5 Lakhs (Rs. Five

lakhs only) on the company and Rs. 1 Lakh (One Lakh

each) on one director and three other officers of the

company (total four persons) and thereby appellants

are liable to pay Rs. 9 Lacs (Rs. Nine Lacs only) for

such alleged violation.

19. In so far as Company Appeal(AT) No. 107 of

2017 is concerned the following order is passed:-

For alleged violation of Section 177 of the

Companies Act, 1956, we impose afine of Rs. 5 lakhs

(Rs. Five Lakhs only) on the company and Rs. 1 lakh

(Rs. One Lakh only) each on one director and two

officers i.e. (total three officers) and thereby the

appellants are liable to pay another some of Rs. 8

lakhs (Rs. Eight Lakhs only) for alleged violation of

Section 177 of the Companies Act, 1956. Thereby, the 4

appellants are liable to pay total sum of Nine Lakhs

plus Eight Lakhs i.e. Seventeen Lakhs.

20. In view of the aforesaid order, we set aside the

impugned common order dated 13th February 2017

passed by Tribunal, New Delhi Bei.ch in C.P.No.

16/09/2017 and C.P.No. 16/10/2017."

The Interlocutory Application Nos. 337/2017 and 338/2017 both stand

disposed of with aforesaid substitution/ modification.

(Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya) Chairperson

(Balvindèr Singh) Member(Technical) sm

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