Disposed

M/S Harbant Mould Pack Povt. Ltd. v. Shaminderjit Singh & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC23 Jan 2013CP/137/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a complaint under Section 454(5-A) of the Companies Act, 1956, the court held that directors of a winding-up company who failed to submit a complete Statement of Affairs committed statutory offences. Considering the respondents' rural status and lack of means for a fine, the court imposed a penalty of Rs. 15,000 each to be deposited in the Common Pool Fund Account.

What did the court decide?

Penalty of Rs. 15,000 each imposed; proceedings disposed upon deposit into Common Pool Fund Account within two months.

M/S Harbant Mould Pack Povt. Ltd. Vs… — Company and Corporate | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

��

��

��

CP No.137 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: 23.01.2013

¶6

¶7

M/s Harbant Mould Pact Pvt. Ltd.

¶8

. . . . Petitioner

¶9

VS.

¶10

Shaminder Jit Singh & Ors. . . . . Respondents

��

Present: Mr. Nitin Jain, Advocate with OL

¶15

Mr. Daman Dhir, Advocate for the respondents

¶16

¶17

��

¶18

(1). This complaint under Section 454(5-A) of the Companies Act, 1956 has been instituted by the Official Liquidator alleging that the respondents who were Directors/Officers of the company-in-liquidation, namely, M/s Harbant Mould Pack Pvt. Ltd. have failed to submit the Statement of Affairs complete in all respect within the stipulated period despite several notices served upon them.

¶19

(2). M/s Harbant Mould Pack Pvt. Ltd – the company-inliquidation was ordered to be wound up by this Court vide order dated 12.02.2009 passed in CP-30-2008 and the Official Liquidator attached to this Court was appointed as its Liquidator. After carrying out inspection of the records it was revealed that the respondents were its Directors of the company-in-liquidation who were called upon to submit the Statement of Affairs. It is averred that the Statement of Affairs

¶20

��

¶21

��

¶22

though was filed but it was incomplete as the required information was not divulged.

¶23

(3). Upon show cause notice, it was reported that respondent No.2 has passed away and respondent No.3 was seriously ill. Keeping in view his precarious health condition, the proceedings against him were also dropped. Respondent No.1 and 4 were consequently directed to submit the Statement of Affairs who subsequently came up with a plea that the needful had been done.

¶24

(4). Counsel for the Official Liquidator has submitted the status report, inter alia, pointing out that the Statement of Affairs filed by respondents No.1 & 4 was incomplete and it lacked the material particulars. Respondents No.1&4 have now taken the following revised plea:-

¶25

“i) That the sole unit of M/s. Harbant Mouldpack Private Limited was taken over by Punjab Financial Corporation on 03.10.1997 along with all movable/immovable assets, furniture and fixtures, vehicles and other miscellaneous assets, statutory records and books of accounts which were sealed by the above Financial Institution inside the factory.

¶26

ii). That the said Punjab Financial Corporation auctioned the total assets of the company on 22.12.2006 and realized its part payment and also

¶27

��

¶28

��

¶29

transferred the ownership thereof in favour of the new buyer.

¶30

iii). That we are not in possession of any books of accounts and other statutory records in fact they were locked inside the factory and later on reportedly destroyed by Punjab Financial Corporation.”

¶31

(5). In view of the candid admission by respondents No.1&4 that they are not in possession of the books of account and other statutory record of the company and are unable to furnish the information as required by the Official Liquidator, there can indeed be no other conclusion except to hold that respondents No.1&4 have failed to comply with the mandate of the Statute and are liable for penal consequences within the meaning of sub-Section (5-A) of Section 454 of the Act.

¶32

(6). It is pointed out that as per the information given by respondents No.1&4, the company-in-liquidation has no movable or immovable assets and a petition for its dissolution under Section 481 of the Act has been separately moved by the Official Liquidator.

¶33

(7). Keeping in view all the attending circumstances and the fact that respondents No.1&4 are ruralites who have no sufficient means to pay fine or penalty, if assessed on literal enforcement of the relevant provisions, I deem it appropriate to conclude these proceedings by imposing a penalty of Rs.15,000/- each to be paid by respondents No.1&4 with a further direction that the afore-stated penalty shall be deposited in the Common Pool Fund Account within a period of two months from

¶34

��

¶35

��

¶36

the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order and upon their doing so, this petition shall be deemed to have been disposed of for all intents and purposes. However, in the event of any default, the Official Liquidator shall be at liberty to seek revival of this petition.

¶37

(8). Disposed of. Dasti .

¶38

��

¶39

!"#$%�"#&'($)

¶40

���)�+�$��$�'�,�� -./

M/S Harbant Mould Pack Povt. Ltd. v. Shaminderjit Singh & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Harbant Mould Pack Povt. Ltd. v. Shaminderjit Singh & Ors.

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

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Oswal Agro Furane Ltd. Vs Abhinash C. Sabharwal

Harmohan Singh Manchanda Vs M/S Maxtel, Infosystems Private Limited

Colorband Dyestuff Pvt. Ltd. Vs S.R. Industries Ltd.

M/S S.K.Cotex Ltd. Vs Mohan Lal and Ors.

M/S S.K.Cotex Ltd. Vs Mohan Lal and Ors.

M/S Harbant Mould Pack Pvt. Ltd. Vs Shaminder Jit Singh & Ors.