If Your Struck off Company is having some property in its name it could be revived by NCLT
Channel: R V Seckar
Date: 2020-08-31

If Your Struck off Company is having some property in its name it could be revived by NCLT 
If Your Struck off Company is having some property in its name or bank balances or has earned revenues , it could be revived by NCLT Under Section 252 of the companies Act , 2013. 

Pending Litigation, at the request of unsecured creditor , to take delivery of imported goods from port,  agreement to sell the properties of struck off companies, proof of new orders on hand or a development contract company’s name can be restored by NCLT. 

GRIFFIN DEVELOPERS PVT LTD v. ROC KERALA
The appellant company applied for striking off the name of the company under Fast Track Exit Scheme (FTE). ROC Kerala accordingly struck off the company.
In the mean time , the Directors of the company purchased some lands and this was inadvertently registered in the name of the company instead of directors Name.
As the lands purchased were registered in the name of the company inadvertently , it has become necessary for the members of the company to restore the name of the company under section 252 of the Companies Act , 2013.

Further , ROC informed that they received tax arrears demand from the Income Tax authorities against the company.
Where appellant-company was able to satisfy that it was owner of property when its name was struck off by respondent-RoC from its register which it wants to utilize now to carry on its business activities and since no objection to restoration of name of appellant-company had been raised in report of RoC, name of appellant-company was to be restored in register of companies.
Company Law  NCLT - Kochi   No objections were received in ROC’s report; name of company was to be restored in register of companies.
Restoration despite annual filing default for 14 years
One can apply for the Restoration of the Name of the Company within 20 years of struck off notice.
Mumbai High Court Allowed pvt co’s name restoration despite annual filing default for 14 years in (Bulakidas Mohta Co. P. Ltd.) v. RoC, Maharashtra, &Ors.
Cannot Operate the Bank Account
Ex-Directors and ex-Authorized Signatories will “not be able to operate bank accounts of such companies till such companies are legally restored under Section 252 of the Companies Act by an order of the National Company Law Tribunal.
ASM Consultant Private Limited, VS  Registrar of Companies, Pune
t is seen from the petition that the company generated revenue in the F.Y. 2016- 17 & 2017-18. The Company has generating revenue to the tune of ₹ 29,18,960/- in the F.Y. 2016-17 and ₹ 12,15,280/- in the F.Y. 2017-18. Therefore, it can be said to be a running concern, the ground for strike-off i.e. “no business operations for a period of last two financial years” by ROC appears to be unfounded
The Company has not deposited heavy cash in its Bank Account during the period of Demonetizations i.e. from 8th November 2016 to 31st December 2016, as noticed from the annexed Affidavit along with this Petition/Application.
However, it is further submitted in the said report that the RoC has no objection to restore the name of the Petitioner Company, if the Petitioner Company is willing to comply with the provisions of the Act, subject to imposition of Cost.
New Delhi NCLT: Allows restoration of Company’s name at the behest of unsecured creditor
Allahabad NCLT: Pending litigation a valid reason for name restoration, allows petition

Allahabad NCLT: Name Restoration necessary for taking delivery of goods from Port, allows application



New Delhi NCLT: Company’s name restoration not at director’s discretion once opted for exit under FTES
The directors had voluntarily sought exit of Petitioner Company under the Fast Track Exit Scheme, 2011 (‘FTES’); Points out that there was nothing on record to show that the Company was transacting business after its dissolution or it had any property; Holds that merely because the directors were now in a position to infuse funds wouldn’t constitute sufficient ground to accept the prayer for restoration of Company’s name in the register of ROC; Remarks that it was not at the discretion of the erstwhile directors of the company to get the company struck off / revive at any time especially when they had exercised the discretion for getting its name struck off under the FTES: NCLT Principal Bench

Chandigarh NCLT: Allows Name Restoration application, notes execution of ‘Agreement to Sell’ of Co.’s property. Referred to the proof of payment and affidavits submitted w.r.t. payment of consideration for sale of property by the directors and shareholders to the Co.: Chandigarh NCLT

Allahabad NCLT: Allows name restoration Application, notes land development agreement during Co. deregistration
Delhi HC: Allows petitioner benefit under CODS Scheme Condonation of Delay Scheme, 2018 (‘CODS2018 Scheme’) despite being struck off u/s. 248
Delhi HC: Permits disqualified Directors to file returns under CODS in hard copies