Mr P Venugopal Shareholder Of Sri Sai ... vs Registrar Of Companies

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT CHENNAI (APPELLATE JURISDICTION) Company Appeal (AT) (CH) No.22/2024 In the matter of: P. Venugopal, Shareholder of Sri Sai Pardha Real Estates Pvt. Ltd., Having office at H.No.4-29, Rudraram Village, Patancheru Mandal, Medak District, Telangana - 502 329. ... Appellant V The Registrar of Companies II Floor, Corporate Bhavan, GSI Post, ThattiAnnaram Village, Bandlaguda, Hyderabad - 500 068. ...Respondents Present : For Appellant : Mr. Avinash Krishnan Ravi & Ms. Renuka Parameswari, Advocates For Respondents : Mr. Prithvi Raj JS, Advocate for R2 & R3 Mr. B. Dhanaraj & Ms. Deepa Mariappan, Advocate for Intervenor ORDER

(Hybrid Mode) 22.01.2026:

The Appellant has preferred the instant Appeal in the capacity of being the

shareholder of M/s. Sri Sai Pardha Real Estates Private Limited, a company

which stood incorporated and registered with the Registrar of Companies. As per

the records of the case, the company was not able to submit its financial statement

for the financial year 1994-1995 and consequently its name was struck off from

the Register of Companies by an order that was passed on 02.07.2018 by

Registrar of Companies. Consequent to this, the proceedings were carried by the

Appellant before the Learned Adjudicating Authority as against the order of

Comp App (AT) (CH) No.22/2024 Page 1 of 4 Registrar of Companies under Section 252(3) of the Companies Act, 2013, which

has been rejected by the impugned order.

2. This would be one of the most unfortunate cases that we have been called

upon to deal with.

3. This Company Appeal was argued quite extensively by the Learned

Counsel for the Appellant. When the Respondents were called upon to address

the Company Appeal, the intervenor raised a preliminary objection that the

instant Company Appeal is barred by limitation for the reason that the impugned

order under challenge is that of 15.06.2022, and according to the records available

with the Registry, the Company Appeal was e-filed on 07.09.2023, and that since

the Appeal has been preferred by invoking the provisions contained under Section

421 of the Companies Act, 2013, the Appeal would be barred by limitation as

contemplated under Sub-Section (3) of Section 421 of the Companies Act, 2013,

which mandated that the Appeal under Section 421 shall be filed within 45 days

from the date on which the copy of the order is made available to the person

aggrieved, which can be extended by this Appellate Tribunal for a further period

not exceeding 45 days. Apparently, it seems to be correct also, because the instant

appeal as against the order of 15.06.2022, has been filed only on 07.09.2023,

which would apparently render the appeal barred by limitation since having been

preferred beyond the condonable period.

Comp App (AT) (CH) No.22/2024 Page 2 of 4

4. The Appellant has contended that if the dates and events as it has been

provided by the Appellant, is taken into consideration, it can be seen that the

Appeal has been filed within the said time limit. To support his case, he has

referred to two diary numbers, which have been given under the dates and events

column provided by the Appellant, which is extracted hereunder: -

7. Date of original e-filing of the Appeal before NCLAT, 15th July, 2022 Chennai (E-filing No.9805130/01432/2022)

8. Date of refilling of the Appeal before NCLAT, 7th Sept, 2023 Chennai (E-filing No.9805130/01972/2022)

5. He has claimed that he has actually filed the Appeal on 15.07.2022 and

refiled the same on 07.09.2023 and therefore the Appeal has been filed in time.

On examination of the records, it is found that as against the e-filing number

No.9805130/01432/2022, which is claimed by the Appellant to be the original

e-filing number, no records are available with the NIC. The same was also

crosschecked with NIC data. Further, the transaction ID 1307220008121 of

Bharatkosh portal which gives the details of payment done for filing the appeal,

corresponds with the E-filing No.9805130/01972/2023, which pertains to

07.09.2023. In that eventuality, we will have to take the e-filing date as to be

07.09.2023, owing to the information which we have gathered from the IT

Section and upon its comparison with the transaction ID of Bharatkosh.

6. Besides that, if we look into the impugned order, and the notings made

therein at its footnote, it shows that the order was rendered on 15.06.2022, and

Comp App (AT) (CH) No.22/2024 Page 3 of 4 the same was brought in public domain on 27.06.2022. Hence, filing of an appeal

on 07.09.2023 would be barred by limitation since being beyond the period

prescribed under Sub-Section (3) of Section 421 of the Companies Act, 2013.

Hence, the Company Appeal (AT) (CH) No.22/2024 would stand dismissed on

this limited ground only.

[Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma] Member (Judicial)

[Jatindranath Swain] Member (Technical) VG/MS/AK

Comp App (AT) (CH) No.22/2024 Page 4 of 4