Salil K.Roy Chowdhury, J. - (1.) This is an application, inter alia, for removal of the liquidator and for appointment of an official liquidator as the liquidator in his place and stead. There are other prayers for determination that the petitioner, Bhawani Shankar Sahay, the liquidator, was not entitled to act and has not acted as a liquidator and also for stay of all criminal proceedings mentioned in para. 17 of the petition and an injunction restraining the Registrar of Companies, respondent No. 1, from instituting further criminal proceedings against the petitioner as a liquidator of the company.
(2.) It appears that the present application is made under various sections of the Companies Act including Sections 515 and 633 of the Companies Act. The company, by a resolution dated 6th September, 1971, was wound up voluntarily nominating the petitioner as the liquidator of the said company for the purpose of winding up on a remuneration of Rs. 2,000. The petitioner received the copy of the said resolution and a sum of Rs. 400 as part payment of the resolution on the 7th September, 1971. It appears that neither the company nor the liquidator has complied with the provisions for filing the resolutions or caused a notice to be published in the Gazette and other requirements under the law and subsequently the Registrar made certain correspondence with the company and the petitioner regarding the filing of documents by the company in compliance with the Companies Act. It also appears that by a letter dated 7th September, 1971, the petitioner, the liquidator appointed in the said voluntary liquidation of the company, intimated the Registrar of Companies about his appointment. It appears that the directors of the company, with a copy to the liquidator, were addressed by Registrar on the 7th February, 1972, for filing the Gazette publications along with form No. 36A filed by the said directors of the company on the 14th September, 1971, It also appears from a letter dated 28th August, 1973, written on behalf of the Registrar of Companies, West Bengal, to one of the managing directors of the company, viz., Jagat Bhusan Garg, that for non-compliance of filing the notice and the publications under Sections 500(2) and 485 not being submitted, the company cannot be treated to be in liquidation and, therefore, the directors continued to be liable for not complying with the statutory requirements under the Companies Act as an existing company.
(3.) It appears that subsequently the petitioner obtained certain extracts from the Calcutta Gazette dated 23rd September, 1971, and forwarded the same to the Registrar. Immediately thereafter, the respondent No. 1 started seven criminal cases between 8th January to 17th January against the petitioner under Section 551(5) of the Companies Act. The petitioner, thereafter, on or about 10th May, 1978, filed this application and on the 12th May an ad interim injunction in terms of prayer (d) was issued.;