Delhi High Court - Orders
P Sen (Enginering) Private Limited & Anr vs Union Of India & Anr on 4 April, 2022
Author: Yashwant Varma
Bench: Yashwant Varma
$~25 & 26
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 5497/2021 & CM APPL. 42434/2021(Add. Of Name)
P SEN (ENGINERING) PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR...... Petitioners
Through: Ms. Jyoti Taneja, Mr. Abhijat, and
Mr. Harkirat Singh, Advs.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Dev P. Bhardwaj, CGSC with
Mr. Sarthak Anand and Ms. Anubha
Bhardwaj, Advs for UOI.
Mr. OP Gaggar and Mr. Sachindra,
Adv. for R-2.
Mrs. Pooja M. Saigal, Mr. Anshul
Bajaj, Mr. Simrat Singh Pasay and
Mr. Chaitanya Pandey, Advs. for R-3
and R-4
+ W.P.(C) 5509/2021
P. SEN (TECHNICAL SERVICES) PVT LTD & ANR..... Petitioners
Through: Ms. Jyoti Taneja, Mr. Abhijat, and
Mr. Harkirat Singh, Advs.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Dev P. Bhardwaj, CGSC with
Mr. Sarthak Anand and Ms. Anubha
Bhardwaj, Advs for UOI.
Mr. OP Gaggar and Mr. Sachindra,
Adv. for R-2.
Mrs. Pooja M. Saigal, Mr. Anshul
Bajaj, Mr. Simrat Singh Pasay and
Mr. Chaitanya Pandey, Advs. for R-3
and R-4
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:NEHA
Signing Date:06.04.2022
15:05:38
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA
ORDER
% 04.04.2022 The present writ petition assails the disclosure made by the first respondent on its official web portal intimating the petitioner of its decision not to register certain returns which had been submitted. These returns which were titled as DIR-12 essentially sought to place on the record the purported removal of two Directors and the consequential appointment of two additional Directors of the company. There appears to be a serious managerial dispute inter partes as would be evident from the return which has been filed in these proceedings by the private respondents.
The issue which arises for consideration is whether the concerned jurisdictional Registrar of Companies undertook the exercise as contemplated under Rule 11 and formed the opinion of not authenticating the returns or whether the communication sent by the MCA is based on an independent assessment. This issue arises in light of the submission of Mr. Abhijat, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, who contends that the respondents have failed to place on the record any material which may have indicated that the requisite statutory enquiry was undertaken by the Registrar or placed for the consideration of the Additional Director in terms of Rule 11. Learned counsel for the petitioner prays for time to obtain instructions from his clients before proceeding further.
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:NEHA Signing Date:06.04.2022 15:05:38List again on 20.05.2022.
YASHWANT VARMA, J.
APRIL 4, 2022/neha Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:NEHA Signing Date:06.04.2022 15:05:38