Rajendra Singh Chauhan vs M/S Dook Consulting Services Pvt Ltd

HYBRID MODE 14.11.2025: This appeal is filed against an impugned order dated 15.07.2025

passed by the Ld. NCLT, New Delhi in CA/442/ND/2021 in CP No.54/ND/2014

whereby the Ld. NCLT has dismissed the application CA/442/ND/2021 which

sought restoration of the Company Petition. Admittedly, the Company Petition

was dismissed in default on 01.07.2021 for non-prosecution as it noted in the

impugned order that the appellant remained absent on 08.12.2020, 01.03.2021

and on subsequent hearings. Further on 01.07.2021, none appeared on behalf

of either of the parties. Even vide an earlier order dated 17.12.2019, a valuer

was appointed and directions were issued to the concerned petitioners to serve

copies to the respondent who were directed to be present but for over 1 ½ years

no progress was reported to the Tribunal and thus considering the prolonged

inaction and continued absence of the parties, the Tribunal vide order dated

01.07.2021 had dismissed the company petition for non-prosecution. Hence an 2

application CA 442/ND/2021 was filed for restoration of Company Petition but

during the interregnum, the Ld. NCLT observed the company was struck of from

the register of companies as per information available from MCA Portal and thus

it was no longer legally recognized for a valid business or capable to hold any

assets in its name. Its certificate of incorporation was deemed to be cancelled

2. Now admittedly, no appeal was filed against the order of striking of the

name of the company and thus Ld. NCLT was of the view that unless and until

the company is revived, no Company Petition for oppression and

mismanagement would be maintainable and as such dismissed the application.

However, it was also noted the appellant had failed to present any cogent or

satisfactory explanation for the delay in prosecuting the matter and had rather

displayed continued lack of diligence, having failed to cooperate with the

appointed valuer and assist in assessing the financial status of the company,

which rather became non-operational by the time the application for restoration

came to be heard and thus vide the impugned order, the Ld. NCLT had dismissed

the application for restoration.

3. To our mind, since an appeal restoring the name of the company to the

register of the members is not filed as yet and the company being not in

existence, hence until and unless the company's name is restored, the petition

for oppression and mismanagement would not be maintainable, hence there

would be no use to allow this appeal or give directions to continue with the

Company Petition, till such company's name is restored and thus we dispose of 3

this appeal with a liberty to the appellant to revive it, once the name of the

company is restored.

Pending applications, if any, are also closed.

(Justice Yogesh Khanna) Member (Judicial)

(Mr. Ajai Das Mehrotra) Member (Technical) Bm/rr