TRILOCHAN PANDA Vs. REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. Behera, learned advocate appears on behalf of appellants. He submits, impugned is judgment dtd. 1/2/2023, passed by the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (Special Court)-cum-Assistant Sessions Judge, Cuttack. He submits, under clause (b) in sub-clause(1) of Sec. 149, Companies Act, 2013, second proviso requires the company to have at least one woman director. Such a director could not be appointed in the period because the company's licence to do business stood revoked. Subsequent thereto there was requirement by the Registrar of Companies (RoC) to appoint further directors, which is why there were appointments. The judgment is erroneous. He submits, the appeal be admitted and interim protection of stay of realization of penalty be directed.

(2.) Mr. Parhi, learned advocate, Dy. Solicitor General appears on behalf of Union of India along with Mr. Tripathy, learned advocate, Central Government Counsel. Mr. Parhi waives formal notice of appeal on assurance by Mr. Behera that extra copy or appeal papers will be served to the office.

(3.) The appeal is admitted. The direction for realizing the penalties be stayed till disposal. The I.A. is disposed of.