Remanded

Kapil Garg v. Union of India and Anr.

Delhi HC1 May 2018W.P.(C)/4512/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged an order where the ROC failed to call a key witness, Ms. Shriya Jain, during an enquiry into whether the petitioner acted as a director after his resignation. The Court set aside the order and remanded the matter for a fresh enquiry.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order set aside and matter remanded to the ROC for a fresh enquiry after calling Ms. Shriya Jain.

Kapil Garg Vs Union of India and Anr. — Company and Corporate | Delhi HC (2018)

¶1

$~33

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 4512/2018

¶4

KAPIL GARG ..... Petitioner

¶5

Through: Ms. Sima Gulati with Ms. Ridhima Gulati & Ms. Revati Gulati, Advs.

¶6

versus

¶7

UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. B.S.Shukla, CGSC for R-1 & 2.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER

¶10

O R D E R

¶11

% 01.05.2018

¶12

CM APP No. 17340/2018

¶13

Issue notice.

¶14

Mr. B.S.Shukla, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of the official respondents. Mr. Shukla states that he does not wish to file a reply in the matter in view of the directions I intend to pass.

¶15

3 The record shows that the petitioner had approached this Court in the first instance by way of writ petition bearing No.11709/2017. This petition was disposed of by order dated 2^nd January, 2018. By virtue of the said order, the ROC was directed to carry out an enquiry as to whether the petitioner had acted as a director since 28.11.2011 qua the subject company.

¶16

3.1 To be noted, it was the petitioner‟s stand that he had resigned from the subject company on 28.11.2011 and that he had transferred his shares in favour of one, Mr. P.K. Jain, the husband of Ms. Shriya Jain, the person who was appointed as a Director on the Board of the subject company.

¶17

A perusal of the impugned order shows that the ROC did not call W.P.(C) 4512/2018 Page 1 of 2

¶18

upon Ms. Shriya Jain to give her version of events while ascertaining as to whether or not the petitioner had acted as Director of the subject company after 28.11.2011.

¶19

4.1 The ROC, in my opinion, given the circumstances obtaining in the case ought to have called upon Ms. Shriya Jain to explain her stand in the matter.

¶20

Given these circumstances, the impugned order is set aside. The matter is remanded to the ROC for a fresh enquiry.

¶21

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner is a Director on the Board of other companies which are active and fully functional and the continued inclusion of the petitioner‟s name in the list of disqualified directors is impacting his functionality qua such companies. For this purpose my attention is drawn to Annexure B. Unfortunately, the master data of companies referred to in Annexure B has not been placed before the Court.

¶22

6.1 Therefore, in case the petitioner files an affidavit with the ROC bringing to light this fact, the ROC will be authorized to activate the DIN and DSC of the petitioner after he has ascertained the correct facts qua this aspect of the matter.

¶23

6.2 The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶24

Dasti under signatures of the Court Master.

¶25

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J

¶26

MAY 01, 2018/ak

¶27

Page 2 of 2

¶28

W.P.(C) 4512/2018

Kapil Garg v. Union of India and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kapil Garg v. Union of India and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shubh Impex Vs Union of India & Ors.

J.Ram Prasad Vs UOI & Ors.

Bhupinder Singh Vs Bank of Baroda & Ors.

Raichel P Abraham Vs Bharat Heavy Electricals Limit

Supriti Bishwas & Ors. Vs UOI & Ors.

Sarita Vs Registrar Cooperative Societie

Shashi Dua Vs Registrar Cooperative Societie

Uk Paints (Overseas) Ltd. Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 20, New Delhi

Kamini Doshi and Ors. Vs Union of India and Anr.

Vinay Jain and Anr. Vs Union of India and Ors.

Shailendra Kumar Vs Union of India and Ors.

Cadila Healthcare Limited Vs Union of India and Anr.

Our Lady of Health Vailankanni South Indian Bhajana Sabha Vs Union of India and Ors.

Rohini Sawhney Vs Union of India and Ors.