GUJARAT INJECT LTD Vs. YOGESH R MANKODI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Official Liquidator has filed this criminal complaint under Section 454 (5) of the Companies Act, 1956 praying for taking cognizance of default committed by the accused persons under Section 454 (5) of the Companies Act, 1956 and issuance of process against the accused persons for trying and punishing them in accordance with the provisions of law. The Official Liquidator has also sought for the direction to the accused persons to submit forthwith the statement of affairs before him as on the date of winding up order i. e. 20. 01. 2000.

(2.) IT is the case of the Official Liquidator in the complaint that by an order dated 20. 01. 2000 passed by this Court in Company Petition No. 18 of 1999, the Company, namely, M/s. Gujarat Inject Limited was ordered to be wound up and he has been appointed as the Liquidator of the said Company. The accused Nos. 1 to 11 were the Directors of the said Company as on the relevant date of winding up order as per the records maintained by the Registrar of Companies, Ahmedabad. As per the provisions of Section 454 of the Companies Act, 1956, the ex-Directors of the Company were required and legally bound to file with the Official Liquidator the statement of affairs of the Company in liquidation within 21 days from the date of winding up order or such time as may be extended by the Official Liquidator or High Court, not exceeding three months. Due notices under Section 454 of the Companies Act, 1956 were issued to accused Nos. 1 to 11 on 10. 02. 2000 and despite that fact, the accused persons have not filed any statement of affairs with him and hence, they have committed default without any reasonable or lawful excuse. The Official Liquidator has further stated that the accused persons have also failed to hand over the books of accounts and records of the Company to him. He was, therefore, of the view that the accused persons have willfully and deliberately neglected to file the statement of affairs with him and thereby they have committed default under Section 454 (5) of the Companies Act, 1956. All the accused persons are, therefore, required to be prosecuted.

(3.) THIS Court has issued process on 06. 09. 2000. Vide order dated 20. 01. 2006, accused Nos. 1 and 4, namely, Shri Yogesh R. Mankodi and Shri Nayankumar T. Vaishnav (wrongly shown as Narayan T. Vaishnav) were discharged as both were expired. Death certificate of accused No. 1 dated 08. 01. 2004 issued by Vadodara Municipal Corporation was filed on record. Similarly, death certificate of accused No. 4 issued by Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay has also been filed. Accused No. 7, namely, Nareshchand Jain was also discharged as he resigned from the office of the Director with effect from 21. 10. 1997 and the erstwhile management had filed Form No. 32 with the Registrar of Companies, Gujarat on 15. 12. 1997. The Company was directed to be wound up on 20. 01. 2000 whereas accused No. 7 had resigned much before the date of winding up order. Thereafter, accused No. 6, namely, Hrishikesh S. Jana was also discharged vide order dated 19. 06. 2006. He has expired and his death certificate issued by Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation on 03. 03. 2006 was filed before the Court. It is also submitted before the Court that accused No. 10, namely, Shri Chandulal P. Shah has also expired. However, his death certificate is not brought on record. So far as accused Nos. 8,9 and 11 are concerned, they were Nominee Directors. The real contesting parties are, therefore, accused Nos. 2,3 and 5.