contrary, Learned counsel for the respondent
submitted that the DIR 12 with respect to petitioner no. 1 had
been filed by the accused company ... said DIR 12 does
not mention that the said director is a non-executive director as
is evident from the E-Form DIR 12 filed
directors.
The Secretary of the Company/petitioner No.11 uploaded Form DIR - 12 on behalf
of petitioner No.1 - company on 23.06.2015 describing petitioner ... uploaded in the web portal of
Registrar of Companies by filing DIR - 12, but they were arrayed as accused and the
Special Judge for Economic
directors.
The Secretary of the Company/petitioner No.11 uploaded Form DIR - 12 on behalf
of petitioner No.1 - company on 23.06.2015 describing petitioner ... uploaded in the web portal of
Registrar of Companies by filing DIR - 12, but they were arrayed as accused and the
Special Judge for Economic
Independent
Director on the board of the company.
Form DIR 12 shows that the petitioner has been holding the
designation of "Additional Director ... additional and not Independent Director is wrong and misinterpreted.
The said DIR 12 on page 23 under the column designation it is
stated "Additional
Independent
Director on the board of the company.
Form DIR 12 shows that the petitioner has been holding the
designation of "Additional Director ... additional and not Independent Director is wrong and misinterpreted.
The said DIR 12 on page 23 under the column designation it is
stated "Additional
Independent
Director on the board of the company.
Form DIR 12 shows that the petitioner has been holding the
designation of "Additional Director ... additional and not Independent Director is wrong and misinterpreted.
The said DIR 12 on page 23 under the column designation it is
stated "Additional
complainant and caused loss to the company
and forged DIR 12 Forms. The accused persons were diverted
the funds invested by the complainant to their ... about 100
Lorries and caused loss to the
company and forged DIR 12 Forms
with retrospective effect. The accused
persons were diverted the investment
amount
Section 141 of NI Act against
them.
e) Because copy of DIR12 (ROC Record) is a public
document under provisions of Companies ... oral evidence is required
to prove the said document. Copy of DIR12 (ROC Record)
Case Registration No. 256/2019 Amit Kumar Sharma
Section 141 of NI Act against
them.
e) Because copy of DIR12 (ROC Record) is a public
document under provisions of Companies ... oral evidence is required
to prove the said document. Copy of DIR12 (ROC Record)
Case Registration No. 30/2019 Amit Kumar Sharma
Section 141 of NI Act against
them.
e) Because copy of DIR12 (ROC Record) is a public
document under provisions of Companies ... oral evidence is required
to prove the said document. Copy of DIR12 (ROC Record)
unequivocally establishes that petitioners were not Director of
accused
