Allowed

M/S Bangalore on Line (India) Ltd. v. Nil

Karnataka HC7 Jan 2014CA/30/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court appointed an auditor for the Official Liquidator of M/s. Bangalore On-Line (India) Limited for the half-year ending 30.09.2012 under Section 462 of the Companies Act, 1956. The court enhanced the auditor's remuneration range and dispensed with the requirement to furnish printed copies to creditors.

What did the court decide?

Auditor appointed; fee enhanced to Rs.500 minimum and Rs.4,000 maximum; requirement to furnish printed audited report to creditors dispensed with.

M/S Bangalore on Line (India) Ltd. Vs Nil — Company and Corporate | Karnataka HC (2014)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

¶3

DATED THIS THE 07^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2014 BEFORE:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY

¶5

COMPANY APPLICATION No. 30 OF 2013

¶6

¶7

COMPANY PETITION No. 279 OF 2002 BETWEEN:

¶8

M/s. Bangalore On-Line (India) Limited (in liquidation), represented by Official Liquidator, High Court of Karnataka, Corporate Bhavan, 12^th Floor, Raheja Towers, No.26-27, M.G.Road, Bangalore – 560 001.

¶9

… APPLICANT

¶10

(By Shri. K.S. Mahadevan , Advocate for Official Liquidator)

AND:

Nil.

…RESPONDENT

This Company Application is filed under Section 462 of the Companies Act, 1956 read with Rules 11[b] and 298 of the Companies [Court] Rules, 1959, praying to appoint an Auditor to audit the accounts of the Official Liquidator for the half year ending 30.09.2012 and fix his remuneration and etc;

¶16

¶17

This Company Application coming on for Orders this day, the Court made the following: -

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

The audit report is accepted.

¶20

Insofar as the auditor’s fee is concerned, it is noticed that

¶21

this court, by its order dated 8.6.2007, had considered the need for enhancing the auditor’s fee payable and taking into consideration

¶22

the minimum and maximum fee payable to the auditor, that was

¶23

fixed in the year 1996 at Rs.110/- and Rs.1,000/-, respectively, had enhanced it to Rs.250/- being the minimum fee payable and

¶24

Rs.2,000/- being the maximum fee payable.

¶25

Having regard to the fact that seven years have elapsed

¶26

since then and given the expenses involved, even towards the clerkage, it is appropriate that the fee be enhanced substantially.

¶27

Accordingly, the minimum fee payable shall be

¶28

Rs.500/- and the maximum fee payable shall be Rs.4,000/-. The Official Liquidator is permitted to pay the fee within the above

¶29

¶30

range, in his discretion, having regard to the volume of work involved in the present case.

¶31

The requirement under Section 462(5) of the Companies Act, 1956, of furnishing a printed copy of the audited report to each of the creditors, is dispensed with.

¶32

The application is accordingly disposed of.

¶33

Sd/JUDGE

¶34

M/S Bangalore on Line (India) Ltd. v. Nil

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Bangalore on Line (India) Ltd. v. Nil

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Narayanappa Vs State of Karnataka

Miss M L Usha Rani Vs Karnataka Veterinary, Animal &

Syed Akbar Azam Vs M/S Silver Stone Builders & Developers

Nova Medical Centers Private Limited Vs Nil

Sri Munianjanappa Vs State of Karnataka

M/S Bellary Spinning & Weaving Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs Nil