Sri. A.K. Kanoria vs M/s. Bangalore Pesticides Limited

Anand Byrareddy, J.—Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner is said to be the ex-Managing Director of a Public Limited Company namely M/s. Bangalore Pesticides Limited which was ordered to be wound up by the Company Court in Company Petition No. 40/1998 by an order dated 16.02.1999. The Official Liquidator was appointed to look into the affairs of the Company. The Official Liquidator had filed an application u/s 538(1)(a) and (b) read with Section 468 of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as ''the Companies Act'', for brevity) in C.A. No. 1662/2000 before the Company Court on the ground that the Books of Accounts had not been delivered to the respondent--Official Liquidator. That application was resisted by the petitioner by filing objections denying that there was any such default. Therefore the Company court dealing with the application, had opined that it should go before the Magistrate. Accordingly, a complaint had been lodged before the Magistrate. It is now the grievance of the petitioner that on such a complaint filed u/s 538(1) of the Companies Act read with Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as ''the Cr.P.C.'' for brevity), the Magistrate having issued process to the petitioner, the petitioner is before this Court.

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the entire Books of Accounts had been furnished to the Official Liquidator and the Official Liquidator also having made a demand for a further deposit of a sum of Rs. 4,950/- for the purpose of verification, even that has been complied with and therefore, there is no default in the non-production of documents which was the earlier allegation. It is only in view of the Company Court having opined that the Official Liquidator would have to file a formal complaint before the Court of the Magistrate that the application has-been made mechanically and the Magistrate without taking into account the fact that there is no default insofar as the production of Books of Accounts is concerned, has issued process.

The learned counsel appearing for the respondent would not seriously dispute the position that certain Books of Accounts had indeed been furnished to the Official Liquidator, though the learned counsel does not admit that the entire Books of Accounts may have been furnished and it is subject to further verification. Taking into account the above state of affairs, the proceedings before the court below are therefore rendered redundant and the order dated 18.06.2007 in C.C. No. 554/2007 on the file of the Special Court for Economic Offences, Bangalore and all other proceedings thereto are quashed.