Rajiv Gaur & Anr v. Union of India & Anr

Delhi High Court · 27 Feb 2018 · 2018:DHC:1449
Rajiv Shakdher
W.P. (C) 1851/2018
2018:DHC:1449
corporate appeal_allowed Procedural

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court granted interim relief to directors disqualified due to striking off of a company's name, allowing them to function in other active companies pending final adjudication.

Full Text
Translation output
W.P. (C) 1851/2018
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
JUDGMENT
pronounced on: 27.2.2018
W.P.(C) 1851/2018 & CM No.7722/2018 (stay)
RAJIV GAUR & ANR ..... Petitioners
Through Mr. Syed Asif Iqbal and Mr. Parmesh Bali, Advs.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ANR ....Respondents
Through Mr. Bhagvan Swarup Shukla, CGSC with Mr. Suraj Kumar, Adv. for R-1/UOI.
CORAM
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER, J. (ORAL)

1. Issue notice. Mr. Shukla accepts notice on behalf of respondent no.1.

2. In this case, the petitioners’ disqualification occurred on account of the name of Shamoga Valley Resorts Pvt. Ltd. (in short “SVRL”) being struck off from the Register of Companies.

3. It appears that the petitioners have had, in the past, disputes with other directors on the Board of SVRL, namely, 2018:DHC:1449 Mr. Ajay Chaudhary, Mr. Sanjay Chaudhary and Mr. Naresh Thakur and his wife. Though the disputes appeared to have been settled qua these persons, I am informed that the petitioners did not want to continue their engagement with SVRL.

4. It is contended on behalf of the petitioners that they are also directors on the Boards of other companies which are active and fully functional. 4.[1] The submission, therefore, is that the inclusion of the name of the petitioners in the list of directors disqualified for Financial Years 2014 to 2016, i.e. (annexure P-1) is impacting their role as directors in those companies which are active and functional. 4.[2] The details of these companies have been provided in the petition.

5. Mr. Shukla, who appears on an advance notice says that he would have to take instructions in the matter since the petitioners do not wish to continue their engagement with SVRL.

6. In these circumstances, renotify the matter on 16.5.2018. By which time, Mr. Shukla will file a counter affidavit on behalf of the respondents.

7. In the meanwhile, the operation of the impugned list i.e., (annexure P-1) insofar as it includes the name of the petitioners is stayed till 31.3.2018.

8. In order to facilitate the petitioners functioning as directors qua active and functional companies respondents will re-activate the petitioners’ DIN & DSC. This facility is given to the petitioners only till 31.3.2018.

9. By which time, I am told the Division Bench No.1 would have heard the matter pending before it which deals with a similar issue.

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J FEBRUARY 27, 2018 rb