Appellate Court Can Allow Additional Evidence To Ensure Fair Adjudication Even If Not Produced In Trial: Madhya Pradesh High Court Police Can Freeze Bank Accounts Under Section 106 BNSS Upon Suspicion Of 'Proceeds Of Crime': Punjab & Haryana High Court 'No Penalty For Monthly MGQ Shortfall If Annual Target Met': Supreme Court Upholds Quashing Of Excise Department Demands For Liquor Licensees 'Murder Went Unavenged, But Courts Cannot Convict On Mere Assumptions': Supreme Court Acquits Accused In 1988 Murder Case, Quashes High Court's Remit Order 'NCSC Cannot Pass Mandatory Adjudicatory Orders Directing Payment Of Arrears': Supreme Court Clarifies Commission's Powers Under Article 338 "'Cannot Present Fait Accompli': Supreme Court Upholds Denial Of NOC To Airman For Skipping Prior Permission To Apply For Civil Post" Supreme Court Upholds 2017 Notification For Ex Post Facto Environmental Clearances, Quashes 2021 Office Memorandum As Impermissible Executive Overreach Workman Fails To Prove 240 Days Continuous Work; Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Denial Of Reinstatement For "Abandonment Of Service" Party Cannot Take Contradictory Stands In Same Case, Admissions In Pleadings Bind Them Under Order XII Rule 6 CPC: Telangana High Court Delayed Recovery Of Weapon From Open Space Casts Serious Doubt On Prosecution Story: Madhya Pradesh High Court Acquits Murder Convicts Procedural Irregularities By Public Servants Serve As Circumstantial Evidence Of Conspiracy In Corruption Cases: Kerala High Court Blaming Previous Counsel For Omission Does Not Satisfy 'Due Diligence' Test To Amend Plaint After Trial Commences: Punjab & Haryana High Court Muslim Man's Second Marriage Under Special Marriage Act Void Despite Personal Law Permitting Bigamy: Karnataka High Court Suppression Of Material Facts Regarding Criminal Antecedents Disentitles Accused To Discretionary Relief Of Bail: Orissa High Court Section 311 CrPC | Delay Or Absence Of Examination-In-Chief No Bar To Summon Material Witnesses: Allahabad High Court Revenue Authorities Lack Jurisdiction To Declare Genuineness Of Wills Or Validity Of Settlement Deeds; Parties Must Approach Civil Court: Andhra Pradesh High Court Demand Of Bribe Is Sine Qua Non For Conviction Under PC Act, Mere Recovery Of Tainted Money Not Enough: Bombay High Court Title And Ownership Irrelevant In Suit Under Section 6 Specific Relief Act; Plaint Liable To Be Rejected If Filed Beyond Six Months: Delhi High Court Receipt Of Pension By Widow Can Be Considered To Determine 'Just Compensation' But Not To Deprive Claimants Of Award: Calcutta High Court FSL Report Lacking Scientific Criteria And Data Is Inadmissible In Evidence: Allahabad High Court Issues Directives For Testing Viscera Standard Of Proof In Railway Accident Claims Is Preponderance Of Probabilities, Not Beyond Reasonable Doubt: Gujarat High Court No Second Statutory Appeal Lies Against Conviction By Appellate Court Reversing Acquittal; Revision Is Sole Remedy: Supreme Court Wives' Property Is Their Own, Not Husband's: Supreme Court REJECTS High Court's Succession Formula; Restores Clarity For Christian Inheritance

Nominee Directors Not Liable for Company Defaults - Punjab and Haryana High Court Quashes Proceedings Against Former Employees

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgment, the Punjab and Haryana High Court today quashed the criminal proceedings against former employees of Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation and Industrial Development Bank of India, charged under Section 58A(10) of the Companies Act, 1956. The court's decision, pronounced by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Harpreet Singh Brar, has set a significant precedent regarding the liability of nominee directors in corporate legal disputes.

The petitioners, A.K. Sud and others, and B. Das Gupta, were implicated in a case involving the failure of Euro Cotspin Limited to repay deposits, despite orders from the Company Law Board. Justice Brar, in his observation, stated, "Nominee Director cannot be held liable for any default made by the Company as they are not responsible for day to day business of the Company." This key legal point underlines the limited role and responsibility of nominee directors, shifting the focus away from them in corporate compliance issues.

The crux of the matter was the non-compliance of Euro Cotspin Limited in repaying the deposits as directed by the Company Law Board. The petitioners, serving as nominee directors, argued their non-involvement in the company’s day-to-day affairs and decisions. They highlighted their role as merely representational, based on their official positions in their respective financial institutions.

The court referenced the case of Lok Manya Negi Vs. Registrar of Company Punjab, HP and Chandigarh, where similar proceedings were quashed, suggesting a need for parity in judicial decisions. Furthermore, the judgment cited the case of S.K. Sharma Vs. Registrar of Companies, which established that nominee directors are not liable for a company's operational defaults.

This judgment has significant implications for the roles and responsibilities of nominee directors in corporate governance. It clarifies the extent of their liability and protects them under Section 41-A of the State Financial Corporation Act in actions taken in good faith. This decision is expected to have a far-reaching impact on corporate legal practices and the interpretation of corporate governance norms.

Date of Decision: 09.01.2024

A.K. SUD AND OTHERS.  VS REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES PUNJAB. 

 

Latest Legal News