STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs. REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition filed under Section 141 of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), on December 16, 1996, by State Bank of India (hereinafter referred to as "the hank") for rectification of the register of charges of Kesaria Tea Co. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "the company"}. The facts alleged in the petition are that the bank extended a loan limit of Rs. 15,00,000 to the company on December 4, 1978, against the security of hypothecation of goods, book debts and assets as well as mortgage of immovable properties belonging to the latter. The company had created a charge over its assets by execution of deeds of hypothecation and the memorandum of deposit of title deeds on December 4, 1978. The company filed Form No. 8 before the Registrar of Companies, Kerala, within the prescribed period and the charge was registered on September 17, 1979. But the equitable mortgage in respect of the immovable properties of the company covered under the memorandum of title deeds dated December 4, 1978, was not included in Form No. 8 by the company. The particulars of charge filed by the company and registered by the Registrar of Companies, Kerala, on September 17, 1979, do not cover the immovable properties mortgaged in favour of the bank. This omission on the part of the company came to light when a search of the Register of Charges was taken by the bank from the Registrar of Companies, Kerala. Hence, the petition.

(2.) THE respondent, being the Registrar of Companies, Kerala, has no objection to the above petition being allowed by this Bench.

(3.) DURING the hearing on April 28, 1997, Shri P.P. Zibi Jose, authorised representative for the bank, while reiterating the submissions made in the pleading submitted that the charge was duly created in respect of both the movable and immovable properties of the company. But the charge covering the immovable properties was not registered with the Registrar of Companies. This was an omission on the part of the company. The company had admitted its liability as well as the charge over both the movable and immovable properties in its balance -sheet for the year 1994. The bank would be put to irreparable loss on account of the said omission. It is, therefore, just and equitable to grant relief in favour of the bank.