In this post, we’ll look at how to register a business in Kolkata. Company registration is a procedure through which all businesses are registered on the MCA’s website (Ministry of Corporate Affairs). The Company Registration in Kolkata is a simple procedure, but it requires numerous procedures to complete.

A Private Limited Company offers its stockholders legal protection and limited liability. A privaely held limited firm must have at least positions two working directors. A person can be both a director and a shareholder in a Private Limited Company. After receiving a Certificate of Incorporation, a Private Limited Company (PLC) can begin operations. Within 15 days following its application, a PLC can be implemented.

As a result, we will concentrate on the advantages and procedures of forming a Private Limited Company registrationin Kolkata in this post.

Advantages of forming a private firm company registration in Kolkata

1. A private limited company might have anything from two to fifty directors.
2. It is a legal autonomous body.
3. Directors have limited liability and are not directly responsible for the company’s operations.
4. Directors are only partially liable to creditors.
5. In the event of a default, the bank or creditors will sell the company’s assets rather than personal property.
6. The directors are eligible for tax benefits.
7. Suing or being sued in the name of a registered corporation is possible.
8. Companies that are registered have a higher chance of borrowing money.

Company Registration in Kolkata: Private Company Incorporation Checklist

• Directors: For private company registration in Kolkata, a minimum of two directors is required, with one of them being a resident director.
• The investment must be made in accordance with the business type, and there is no minimum capital investment necessary for a firm.
• Inventive business name: The name of the firm must not be identical or confusingly similar to that of another company.
• Registered address: Every business should have one.

Steps for Incorporation of the Company

The following are the stages of forming a business using the RUN form:

1. After that, create a login account and log in.
2. Enter the name you want to use and cross-reference it with the MCA database.
3. If an established business wants to reverse its name, a CIN will be requested through the RUN e- form.
4. The applicant must specify the name that he or she wishes to keep on file in case the firm’s name is changed or a new company is formed.
5. Then he or she must submit the prospective company’s objects as well as any additional documents in support of the suggested name.

Limited Name Validity

• For a new corporation, an authorised name is valid for 20 days from the date of approval.
• 60 days after the date of authorization for changing the name of an established corporation.

Steps for Private Company Registration in Kolkata

Step 1: Obtain DSC

Because the process is online, a digital signature is required for the incorporation of a private limited company. Members and executives must have a legitimate Class II or Class III DSC.

Step 2: Fill out an application for a DIN number.

A directors must have a DIN and must apply for one on MCA if he does not already have one. A DIN number can be used to become a director in many businesses.

Step 3: Submit an application for name approval

At the time of establishment, the company’s name, as well as SPICe (INC-32) must be submitted for approval. If the name is rejected, it can be resubmitted.

Step 4: e-MoA (INC-33) and e-AoA are the fourth and final steps (INC-34)

Previously, MoA and AoA had to be filed physically, but now they must be filed online on the MCA website. These papers must be digitally signed by the subscribers.

Step 5: PAN and TAN applications

After all of the paperwork have been completed, the applicant should consider applying for a PAN and TAN.

Step 6: Certificate of Incorporation 

MCA & RoC will analyse all of the documentation and issue a Certificate of Incorporation if they are pleased. The Certificate of Incorporation is a legal document that grants the firm legal standing.

7th Step: Open bank Accounts

The firm must create a bank account for any transactions in its name after receiving the certificate of incorporation.

In order to register a company in Kolkata, you’ll need the following documents

Documents required for company registration  in Kolkata:

1. For DSC 
2. DIN (Director Identification Number)
3. Incorporation of a Business

In the case of DSC,

1. Along with the DSC application form, the following papers must be forwarded:
2. The claimant’s photograph (to be stamped across with a blue pen)
3. The director’s address proof (s)
4. Id Proof (Pan Card) of the applicant Passport Aadhar card Driving licence Voter Id card Email Id and contact number (for each director)

DIN

Fill out the e-form DIR -3, which is available on the MCA website. Alongside Form DIR -3, attach the supporting information:

1. Id proof photo of the applicant (attested)
2. Proof of address (attested)
3. Make the payment as directed. The only way to pay is on the internet.
4. There will be a preliminary DIN created.
5. A preliminary DIN becomes an authorised DIN after verification.

• For a Firm’s Registration
• The Firm’s Title
• The firm’s assets
• Investors’ list
• The director’s Id proof is the company’s purpose (s)

1. Aadhar card and passport
2. Id cards for voters and driver’s licence
3. Director’s proof of residence (s)
4. Bank statement Telephone bill
5. The cost of electricity
6. Mobile phone bill (not old than two months)
7. INC-9 Director(s) Consent (form DIR-2) (Affidavit)

• Proof of the registered office’s address

1. Bills of Gas, 
2. Phone, and
3. Electricity

If the office is included in the lease, the lease agreement and a letter of authorization from the owner are required.

Holders of DINs declare themselves

A Private Limited Company Registration in Kolkata is an online operation that should be completed with caution, and once completed, the directors are entitled to all of the privileges of a Private Limited Company.

The post Private Limited Company Registration in Kolkata Via Online Method appeared first on MUDS.

Releases from the RBI Monetary Policy 2022 Meeting: The six-member Monetary Policy 2022 Committee (MPC), led by Reserve Bank of India (RBI) Governor Shaktikanta Das, maintained the repo rate at 4% and the reverse repo rate at 3.35 % intact. Here’s what the governor of India’s central bank said.

RBI Monetary Policy 2022: The Reserve Bank of India’s (RBI) Monetary Policy 2022 Committee (MPC) retained the repo rate at 4% for the 11th straight approach achieves a ‘affiliative posture,’ according to RBI Governor Shaktikanta Das on Friday.

The MPC decided unanimously to continue the accommodating approach, according to the central bank governor, and the reverse repo rate was also remained steady at 3.35 percent.

The Marginal Standing Facility (MSF) rates and the lending rate were likewise held steady at 4.25 percent.

On May 22, 2020, the RBI reduced its policy repo rate, or short-term lending rate, in an off-policy cycle to boost demand by decreasing interest rates to a historic low.

In a press conference following the Monetary Policy 2022 meeting, Das stated that the RBI will return the liquidity adjustment facility (LAF) corridor to 50 basis points (bps), as it was pre-Covid. The MSF rate and the bank rate remain at 4.25 percent.

“It also agreed to remain accommodating while concentrating on withdrawal of accommodation to ensure that inflation remains within the goal moving ahead, while encouraging expansion,” 

-he added on the central bank’s attitude.

” It will continue to be part of the RBI’s toolbox, and its use will be at the discretion of the RBI for objectives that are indicated from time to time. The FRRR, in conjunction with the SDF, will increase the flexibility of the RBI’s liquidity management framework.”

The RBI reduced its growth prediction for the current fiscal year to 7.2 percent from 7.8 percent previously, while increasing its inflation forecast to 5.7 percent from 4.5 percent.

He went on to say that, given the inordinate volatility in international oil prices as of early February, as well as the extreme uncertainty surrounding the evolving geopolitical tensions, any projection of growth and inflation is fraught with risk, and is largely dependent on future oil and commodity price developments.

Das addressed liquidity and financial market circumstances in his speech, stating that the RBI will continue to take a sophisticated and agile approach to liquidity risk management while preserving appropriate liquidity in the system.

“At the moment, liquidity management is distinguished by two procedures: variable rate reverse repo (VRRR) bids of varied maturities to swallow liquidity, and variable rate repo (VRR) auctions to fill temporary liquidity problems and offset anomalies.” “We will keep taking this strategy,” he stated.

ATM cash withdrawal without a card that is interoperable

In an effort to combat fraud, the Reserve Bank of India agreed on Friday to allow all banks to use card-less cash withdrawal through ATMs. Currently, card-less cash withdrawal via ATMs is a permissible form of transaction allowed by a few banks in the nation on an as-needed basis (for their customers at their own ATMs).

Economic experts and market analysts reacted as follows:

• The severe reduction in GDP forecasts for FY23 and significant increase in inflation expectations for FY23 might suggest some tightening measures in the future, which would be supported by the shift in posture to focus on withdrawal of accommodation. Current geopolitical developments, supply chain concerns, and commodity price increases are tying the RBI’s hands and pushing it to progressively turn hawkish, despite its desire to maintain its pro-growth perspective. The 10-year Gsec yield has increased to 7%, showing the street’s worry over the massive borrowing programme in the face of rising interest rates.”
• “Retaining the repo rate at 4% and the reverse repo rate at 3.35 percent, continuing with the accommodating posture on expected lines,” said V K Vijayakumar, Chief Investment Strategist at Geojit Financial Services. Recognizing the new reality of increased petroleum prices caused by the war, the RBI cut the FY23 GDP growth rate prediction to 7.2 percent from 7.8 percent before and upped the FY23 CPI inflation projection to 5.7 percent from 4.5 percent previously. This is predicated on the premise that crude will be $100 per barrel. This suggests that if crude falls considerably, which is likely if the conflict ends soon, GDP and inflation will improve.The opposite might be true if the battle escalates and petroleum prices rise well beyond $100. The Governor correctly underscored India’s macroeconomic fundamentals, noting to an improvement in the external position aided by record exports, large foreign reserves of $608 billion, and banking sector development. The SDF (Standing Deposit Facility) is a new mechanism established by the central bank to absorb liquidity. 

“The recent RBI Monetary Policy 2022 did not include any surprises,” stated Nish Bhatt, Founder & CEO of Millwood Kane International, “it held rates constant for the 11th straight policy.” However, it has clearly outlined the road to policy unwinding. The emphasis will now be on withdrawing the accommodating policy stance in order to keep inflation under control. The RBI’s statement today plainly suggests the end of loose Monetary Policy 2022, which is reflected in the 10-year benchmark yield, which has reached a multi-year high. The unwinding of liquidity will cause some instability, and it is expected that the RBI would drop the growth rate prediction for FY23 to 7.2 percent, with the inflation target raised to 5.7 percent from 4.5 percent previously. The explicit goal of central banks throughout the world is to manage inflation, unwind lose money, and concentrate on gradual and steady development.“

The post New Monetary Policy 2022: Repo Rate Remained Unchanged appeared first on MUDS.

Have you ever contemplated what could be the best way to remove directors’ disqualification? if you are a director, then you must be wondering what you can do to remove your disqualification and what will be the most suitable way? 

Of course, it depends on what you want out of your career. If you want to remain a director of the old company, then you might need to revive the company first. if you just want to remove disqualification and continue directorship in other firms then there are other ways. Let us find out what is the most suitable way to remove director disqualification for any director. 

Rules for Directors’ Disqualification

The Companies Act of 2013 required companies to furnish documents related to their finances and operations every year. Defaulting on submission of these documents for a continuous period of three years had stricter provisions of punishment compared to the previous version of the Companies Act. The act considered the director of the company responsible for the actions of the company and so, has a policy of strict actions against them in case their company defaults. 

The directors of the company are responsible for the smooth operation of the company and therefore they are responsible for any action taken by the company that leads to failure in complying with the directions of the Government. The following points will give information on rules or issues which can lead to directors’ disqualification,

• Any directors of the company who have been convicted under section 188 by the Court regarding party transactions during the last five years. 
• The Court also has the authority over the disqualification of directors’ who are undischarged insolvent. 
• If any court or tribunal has earlier ordered the disqualification of the director. 
• If the directors fail to inform about their respective shares in any company held by them alone or in collaboration. 
• If the director is convicted in any offense by the Court and sentenced to imprisonment for more than 6 months.
• If the organization fails to redeem any debentures on their due date or fails to pay the interest due.
• If the company of the director has not filed its financial statements and annual returns for three years consecutively. 
• Failure to pay the declared dividend and continuing so for one year or more could also lead to disqualification of the company’s director. 
• If the company has failed to repay the deposit made to it or pay interest on those deposits. 

• If any director has applied for his/her adjudication as an insolvent or if the directors’ application for the same is still pending. 
• If any Court confirms that the director is not of sound mind. 

Analysing Court’s View on Writ Petitions through a Case

Let’s understand how filing a Writ Petition can help in the removal of directors’ disqualification and how Karnataka High Court responded to such petition through the case of Yashodhara Shroff v. Union of India, WP No. 52911 of 2017.

In this case, the High Court Said, “the directors of the struck-off companies under Section 248 of the Act do not per se get disqualified. But, if the said company has also not complied with Section 164(2)(a) of the Act, then the said company being a defaulting company, the directors of such a company get disqualified.”

Order of Karnataka High Court:

• Where the disqualification of the petitioners is based on any financial year “before 01-04-2014 as well as subsequent thereto” while reckoning the continuous period of three financial years under Section 164(2)(a) of the Act, irrespective of whether the petitioners are directors of public companies or private companies, such a disqualification was considered bad in law, and the Writ Petitions are allowed in such cases.
• For cases whose disqualification occurred under the provisions of Companies Act 1956 for directorship in Public Companies, the disqualification stands. 
• The DINs of directors whose disqualification has been removed by the court should be reactivated. 
• If the director is disqualified by considering financial years before 2014 and for private companies only, the disqualification will not be removed.

This case paved the way for other directors to file for relief in the High Court if they want to remove disqualification without the revival of their company. Even after the CODS was over, filing of the Writ petition to remove directors’ disqualification is still the proven way to end the exile for directors. 

Remedies for Directors’ Disqualification

During the initial few years of introduction of the new Companies Act, it was a common understanding that there was no remedy available for directors who are disqualified by RoC.  It was thought that waiting for the five years exile period to end is the only way to resume directorship work. However, there was another option which encompassed the revival of the disqualified company after struck off from RoC. Once the company is revived, its directors could also apply for the revival of their role. There were about 2.4 companies that were axed by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA) using the Companies Act in 2017. These companies started exploring the options for their revival and the directors hoped to get their DIN reactivated. When the MCA came up with the Condonation of Delay Scheme 2018, the company’s directors hoped to get their company revived without paying heavy penalties and apply for their disqualification removal.

This year, the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA) has introduced Companies Fresh Start Scheme, 2020 or CFSS  The scheme offers companies struck off from RoC a one time opportunity of applying for condonation of their failure to comply by the norms (delay of filling the various documents, forms, returns, etc. with the Registrar). Let’s understand the benefits offered under this scheme,

Benefits to Avail in Companies Fresh Start Scheme

Revival of any struck-off company with a complete fee waiver on the application and no penalty for non-compliance.

An immunity period of 6 months (with Immunity Certificate) for the company from the date of closure of CFSS, 2020 i.e., 30 September 2020.

The companies will only have to pay the normal fees prescribed by Companies Rules, 2014 to file for the MCA-21 registry.

Once the company is revived, its disqualified directors can apply for removal of disqualification and reactivation of their DINs. This is currently the most preferable method for directors’ disqualification removal for those who also want to restart their old company. 

Other Remedies

There were many directors and company owners who could not get advantage from the CODS Scheme to revive their business and thus, their directors also missed the chance at the revival of their careers. The directors’ who failed to use this scheme for the removal of disqualification were left with two options.  Either they should apply in the National Companies Law Tribunal and hope to get a company revival order. Once the company was revised, they could apply for the removal of their disqualification and reactivation of DIN. In this case, when the NCLT passed the order of company revival, then RoC used to verify this order and relevant documents of the directors. But this procedure could only be followed if the companies wanted revival, the other option for directors who just wanted to activate their DIN without applying for the revival of their company was to apply for removal of disqualification in the respective High Court through a Writ Petition. The option of writing a Writ Petition to High court is attributed to constitutional rights conferred by Article 226 of the constitution to seek relief. 

How to Draft an Impeccable Writ Petition?

1. The disqualified director must undertake to use his constitutional right to file the Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution in the respective High Court. The High Court should be chosen according to the area of jurisdiction of the company. In the application, the petitioner should include the following information,

• List of date and events of disqualification.
• Affix an urgent application with a Notice of Motion. 
• Should give reasonable justification to court for not filing the statutory documents that led to the disqualification of company and removal of its name from RoC. 
• Inform Court about the current status of the company and its directors seeking relief. 
• List out the companies in which the petitioner is serving as a director. 
• File a copy of the impugned Press Release or Notice issued by the RoC that lists out the names of the disqualified directors. 
• Personal information such as name address and designation of each Memo of parties should be mentioned in the petition. 
• A prayer cause should be attached to dismiss the publication issued by the RoC under Companies Act’s Section 164 (2).

2. After this, the High Court issues orders after hearing the option for reactivation of the DIN of directors. The directors need to file the copy of the order and all other statutory documents to the RoC to continue with the process p0f registration. 
3. Once the defaulter petitioner fulfils all the required documents and completes payment of all the penalties, the RoC will start the process of reactivation. 

Hire an Experienced Representative 

Taking legal help to file a Writ Petition in the High Court is necessary considering the technicalities involved in the process. There are lots of details that should be considered before drafting the petition and only an experienced professional can handle this kind of job. Also, an expert professional from a legal firm will not only help you in the filing of the petition but also help in representing your case in the Court. An advocate from a reputed firm will attend all the hearing of the Court and put arguments effectively to ask for relief from disqualification. Once the Court grants a favourable order, the expert will help you in following the complete procedure mentioned in the order. He will also help you file all the necessary documents in RoC before activation of DIN. 

If you are worried about the outcome of filing a Writ petition in high Court or confused whether it will bring positive results, then this should serve as good news to you. There have been many instances across High Courts from all over the country where the director’s disqualification has been removed after hearing a Writ petition filed by them. The judiciary has granted interim relief to many directors and quashed orders of RoC in some cases. 

The Court is in general agreement with the aggrieved petitioners on the following points:

• Retrospective Application of Companies Act: In some cases, the Court also found the act being applied retrospectively for disqualification of directors. The Courts deemed this kind of application to be unjustified. 
• Contradictory Provisions in the Previous and New Act: The High Court finds it objectionable that the provisions of the Companies Act of 1956 did not have these regulations for the private companies and their directors, and so the new Act should not impose it on them in 2017.
• Order of RoC is Against Natural Justice: In most cases of directors’ disqualification, the aggrieved petitioners have mentioned that they never got any notice regarding their removal from RoC before the orders. Therefore, they never had a chance to clarify to RoC why they were not able to meet all the compliance standards of RoC. This is against the constitutional right of any individual as it doesn’t allow one person to show the cause of their actions and passes the order unilaterally. 

So, you can safely assume that the judiciary generally gives a favourable decision to directors who give valid reasons for defaulting. This should serve as a ray of hope for disqualified directors who are sceptical of filing writ petition for disqualification removal of their directorship. Just select an experienced legal firm that can represent your case efficiently and hope for a positive outcome.

The post What Is the Most Effective Solution to Directorship Disqualification by ROC? appeared first on MUDS.

The Delhi High Court recently passed an order for the removal of directors’ disqualification of multiple directors. In the hearing of Yatin Wadhwa v Ministry of Corporate Affairs & ANR, The bench of Justice Naveen Chawla considered the role of the Companies Fresh Start Scheme 2020 (a scheme allowing the revival of struck-off companies without penalties) and the results of Mukut Pathak & Ors. v. Union of India & Others (2019) to order the removal of disqualification. The Court observed that the directors must be allowed to avail the benefits of Companies Fresh Start Scheme 2020 (CFSS) and for removal of directors’ disqualification is necessary.

What Did the Court Say in Its Judgement?

The petitioners, in this case, were directors who faced disqualification by the RoC. After approaching the Court to put stay on their disqualification, they managed to get an order of stay on their disqualification. But after the stay, the RoC approached the court to remove the stay and let the disqualification commence. In a recent hearing via video conferencing, the petitioners argued that they wanted to avail the CFSS 2020 but could not do so until the disqualification is in place. Therefore, their disqualification must be removed so they can take advantage of the scheme and give a fresh start to their companies and career. The court used the case of Mukut Pathak & Ors. v. Union of India & Others (2019) that had stated that such disqualification under the Companies Amendment Act, 2018 shall not have a retrospective effect and shall only apply from 07th June 2018 onwards. The Court also favored the petitioners on the argument that there is no use of Companies Fresh Start Scheme if the stay on the director’s disqualification is removed. The court observed that the disqualification should be removed to ensure that the directors are able to avail the benefits of CFSS 2020 and do not get affected by the Retrospective effect.

The Companies Fresh Start Scheme was launched by the Government to give a respite to companies who have defaulted in filing financial documents and statements for three years and hence been struck off from RoC. These companies have been allowed to file their requisite documents and regularize their operations. The directors of such companies could also apply for DIN reactivation once their company is revived by this scheme. The Scheme also envisages non-imposition of penalty or any other charges for belated filing of the documents.

The court clarified that the intent and purpose of the CFSS is to allow a fresh start for defaulted companies and the directors of these companies should be allowed to avail the scheme to ensure its effectiveness. The Court observed that in light of the COIVD-19 Pandemic, the scheme should be given full effect and the disqualification of directors could render the scheme useless. 

Finally, the Court relied on the judgment given in Mukut Pathak Case and ordered the Ministry of Corporate Affairs to take the necessary steps to remove the disqualification of petitioners. The hearing also affirmed why taking legal help in the removal of director disqualification is important. The technicalities of such cases can only be handled by a legal professional. 

The post Great News! Delhi High Court Removes Director’s Disqualification Considering the CFSS 2020 appeared first on MUDS.

With the implementation of the Companies Act 2013 the Ministry of Corporate Affairs applied strict norms on companies defaulting on the set compliances mentioned in the act. The Companies Act 2013 had many changes compared to the old Act of 1956. The new Act comprised of strict provisions for non-complying companies which included directors; disqualification. The Act says if any company fails to meet the compliance standards set by the government, then the Registrar of Companies can remove their names from its list of regularised and also, order disqualification of directors for five years. 

In this article, we will understand 

• The situations in which companies are considered defaulters.
• Why and for how long the directors are disqualified?
• What are the ways to remove the director’s disqualification?
• Judiciary’s perspective on cases of removal of director’s disqualification thorough a case from Allahabad High Court. 

We will also understand the process of removal of a director from the perspective of a directors’ disqualification removal case in Allahabad High Court. This will help us understand the general viewpoint od judiciary on cases related to the removal of directors’ disqualification. 

Rules for Companies to fall in Defaulter’s List

The Companies Act of 2013 required companies to furnish documents related to their finances and operations every year. Defaulting on submission of these documents for a continuous period of three years had stricter provisions of punishment compared to the previous version of Companies Act. The act considered the director of the company responsible for actions of the company and so, has a policy of strict actions against them in case their company defaults. 

Grounds for Disqualification of Directors

The directors of the company are responsible for the smooth operation of the company and therefore they are responsible for any action taken by the company that leads to failure in complying with the directions of Government. The following points will give information on rules or issues which can lead to directors’ disqualification,

• Any directors of the company who has been convicted under section 188 by the Court regarding party transections during last five years. 
• The Court also has the authority over the disqualification of directors’ who are undischarged insolvent. 
• If any court or tribunal has earlier ordered the disqualification of the director. 
• If the directors fail to inform about their respective shares in any company held by them alone or in collaboration. 
• If the director is convicted in any offence by the Court and sentenced to imprisonment for more than 6 months.
• If the organisation fails to redeem any debentures on their due date or fails to pay the interest due.
• If the company of the director has not filed its financial statements and annual returns for three years consecutively. 
• Failure to pay the declared dividend and continuing so for one year or more could also lead to disqualification of the company’s director. 
• If the company has failed to repay the deposit made to it or pay interest on those deposits. 

• If any director has applied for his/her adjudication as an insolvent or if the directors’ application for the same is still pending. 
• If any Court confirms that the director is not of sound mind.  

Ways to Remove Directors’ Disqualification

During the initial few years of introduction of the new Companies Act, it was a common understanding that there was no remedy available for directors who are disqualified by RoC.  It was thought that waiting for the five years exile period to end is the only way to resume directorship work. However, there was another option which encompassed the revival of the disqualified company after struck off from RoC. Once the company is revived, its directors could also apply for the revival of their role. There were about 2.4 companies that were axed by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA) using the Companies Act in 2017. These companies started exploring the options for their revival and the directors hoped to get their DIN reactivated. When the MCA came up with the Condonation of Delay Scheme 2018, the company’s directors hoped to get their company revived without paying heavy penalties and apply for their disqualification removal.

It is the responsibility of the company’s director to file all the financial details of the company with the Ministry of Corporate Affairs every year as per the Companies Act. If the directors fail to submit these details for three consecutive years, then the Ministry could go on to remove the company from RoC and deactivate its directors’ DIN for five years. In the year 2018, the Central Government came up with Condonation of Delay Scheme (CODS) where directors could file the relevant document to get their DINs reactivated. The scheme involved the payment of a moderate fee and condonation of hefty penalties due to defaulting on a payment. Many companies at that time used this scheme for revival and removal of directors’ disqualification. This is how this scheme worked:

• The disqualified directors were needed to submit all the statutory document with the RoC to get their DIN activated temporarily.
• The documents are submitted with the statutory fee prescribed in Section 403 of the Companies Act. 
• The small fee needed was only 30000 Rs. With an e-CODS form and so saved companies form hefty penalties. 

Remedies Applicable for Directors’ Disqualification Cases after CODS 

There were many directors and company owners who could not get advantage from CODS Scheme to revive their business and thus, their directors also missed the chance at the revival of their careers. The directors’ who failed to use this scheme for the removal of disqualification were left with two options.  Either they should apply in the National Companies Law Tribunal and hope to get company revival order. Once the company was revised, they could apply for the removal of their disqualification and reactivation of DIN. In this case, when the NCLT passed the order of company revival, then RoC used to verify this order and relevant documents of the directors. But this procedure could only be followed if the companies wanted revival, the other option for directors who just wanted to activate their DIN without applying for the revival of their company was to apply for removal of disqualification in the respective High Court through a Writ Petition. The option of writing a Writ Petition to High court is attributed to constitutional rights conferred by Article 226 of the constitution to seek relief. 

Drafting a Concise Writ Petition

1. The disqualified director must undertake to use his constitutional right to file the Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution in the respective High Court. The High Court should be chosen according to the area of jurisdiction of the company. In the application, the petitioner should include the following information,

• List of date and events of disqualification.
• Affix an urgent application with a Notice of Motion. 
• Should give reasonable justification to court for not filing the statutory documents that led to the disqualification of company and removal of its name from RoC. 
• Inform Court about the current status of the company and its directors seeking relief. 
• List out the companies in which the petitioner is serving as a director. 
• File a copy of the impugned Press Release or Notice issued by the RoC that lists out the names of the disqualified directors. 
• Personal information such as name address and designation of each Memo of parties should be mentioned in the petition. 
• A prayer cause should be attached to dismiss the publication issued by the RoC under Companies Act’s Section 164 (2).

2. After this, the High Court issues orders after hearing the option for reactivation of the DIN of directors. The directors need to file the copy of the order and all other statutory documents to the RoC to continue with the process p0f registration. 
3. Once the defaulter petitioner fulfils all the required documents and completes payment of all the penalties, the RoC will start the process of reactivation. 

Understanding Judiciary’s View on Writ Petitions through a Case

Let’s understand how filing a Writ Petition can help in the removal of directors’ disqualification and how Allahabad High Court quashed cancellation of DIN of 161 directors by RoC Uttar Pradesh.  

In this case, the petitioners were directors of companies which defaulted on submitting their yearly financial statement continuously for a period of three years. The resulted in RoC applying Section 164(2) of the Companies Act leading to company’s name being struck off from RoC and disqualification of their directors. The directors were also disqualified from the directorship of other companies (which were not defaulters). The petitioners also alleged that no show-cause notice was served to them before disqualification and RoC didn’t verify any facts before ordering the cancellation of their DINs for five years. It was argued by petitioners that the ruling of Section 164(2) that disqualifies directors from the directorship of other non-defaulter companies is an irrational and unreasonable violation of the fundamental rights mentioned under Article 19 (1) (g). With these and other arguments, the petitioners asked for the removal of disqualification from directorship and also asked the court to order RoC to reactivate their DIN numbers. 

Order of Allahabad High Court (Disqualification of Directors)

In its orders, the Allahabad High Court’s bench of Justice Rajeev Mishra and Justice Sudhir Agrawal quashed cancellation of DINs of directors and allowed writ petitions partly. The court said,

“The above discussion leads to the consequence that all writ petitions have to be allowed partly and action of respondents in deactivating DIN of petitioners is to be quashed. We accordingly allow writ petitions partly. We also quash the list published by ROC, declaring petitioners in all these writ petitions as disqualified to be Directors of companies and debarment of being Director for a period of five years. Uttar Pradesh ROC, now, shall be at liberty to give notice to petitioners to verify and establish the facts whether disqualification alleged to have been suffered by petitioners-Directors so as to attract Section 164 (2) of Act, 2013, actually exists or not. After giving them the opportunity and being satisfied that such disqualification has occurred, it will proceed further in accordance with the law.”

The above order is a welcome sign for all the directors who are looking for removal of their disqualification from Allahabad High Court. This order could pave the way for other directors to file for relief in the High Court if they want to remove disqualification without the revival of their company. The case has also led the way for directors who were working in multiple companies but removed from directorship just because one of their company defaulted. 

Why Do You Need an Experienced Representative?

Taking legal help to file a Writ Petition in the High Court is necessary considering the technicalities involved in the process. There are lots of details that should be considered before drafting the petition and only an experienced professional can handle this kind of job. Also, an expert professional from a legal firm will not only help you in the filing of the petition but also help in representing your case in the Court. An advocate from a reputed firm will attend all the hearing of the Court and put arguments effectively to ask for relief from disqualification. Once the Court grants a favorable order, the expert will help you in following the complete procedure mentioned in the order. He will also help you file all the necessary documents in RoC before activation of DIN. 

If you are worried about the outcome of filing a Writ petition in high Court or confused whether it will bring positive results, then this should serve as good news to you. There have been many instances across High Courts from all over the country where director’s disqualification has been removed after hearing on Writ petition filed by them. The judiciary has granted interim relief to many directors and, quashed orders of RoC in some cases. So, you can safely assume that the judiciary generally gives a favourable decision to directors who give valid reasons for defaulting. This should serve as a ray of hope for disqualified directors who are sceptical of filing writ petition for disqualification removal of their directorship. Just select an experienced legal firm that can represent your case efficiently and hope for a positive outcome.  

The post A Case Study Explaining Directors’ Disqualification Removal through Writ Petition appeared first on MUDS.

As per the provisions mentioned in the Companies Act 2013, an director of a company can be disqualified for five years from the directorship of his/her company and also banned to join any other organization as a director if his/her current organization fails to submit their financial statement for a period of three years consecutively. Now the obvious question is whether this disqualification can be removed or not? And if it can be removed what are the ways to do it. To answer all these questions we have explored various aspects of the removal of director disqualification in different sections of this article. By the end of the article, you will be able to understand,

• On what grounds directors are disqualified from the organisation?
• Hyderabad High Court’s perspective on such cases
• What was the impact of these new provisions in the act?
• What are the remedies for disqualified directors?

We will also understand the process of removal of a director from the perspective of a directors’ disqualification removal case in Hyderabad High Court. This will help us understand the general viewpoint od judiciary on cases related to the removal of directors’ disqualification. 

Different Grounds for Directors’ Disqualification

The Companies Act of 2013 required companies to furnish documents related to their finances and operations every year. Defaulting on submission of these documents for a continuous period of three years had stricter provisions of punishment compared to the previous version of Companies Act. The act considered the director of the company responsible for actions of the company and so, has a policy of strict actions against them in case their company defaults. 

The directors of the company are responsible for the smooth operation of the company and therefore they are responsible for any action taken by the company that leads to failure in complying with the directions of Government. The following points will give information on rules or issues which can lead to directors’ disqualification,

• Any directors of the company who has been convicted under section 188 by the Court regarding party transections during last five years. 
• If the directors fail to inform about their respective shares in any company held by them alone or in collaboration. 
• If any director has applied for his/her adjudication as an insolvent or if the directors’ application for the same is still pending. 
• If the director is convicted in any offence by the Court and sentenced to imprisonment for more than 6 months.
• If the organisation fails to redeem any debentures on their due date or fails to pay the interest due.
• If the company of the director has not filed its financial statements and annual returns for three years consecutively. 
• If the company has failed to repay the deposit made to it or pay interest on those deposits. 
• Failure to pay the declared dividend and continuing so for one year or more could also lead to disqualification of the company’s director. 

• If any Court confirms that the director is not of sound mind. 
• The Court also has the authority over the disqualification of directors’ who are undischarged insolvent. 
• If any court or tribunal has earlier ordered the disqualification of the director. 

Analysis of Hyderabad High Court’s Order 

Ever since the norms for director disqualification have come into place the high Court’s throughout India are using flurry of writ petitions being filed for relief. Let’s understand how filing these Petitions have helped the petitioners in their cases through a case study of M/s. Dr Reddy’s Research Foundation & Ors. Vs. The Ministry of Corporate Affairs & Anr. 

“In this case, it was argued by the sides that the action of disqualification was considered due to non-filing of financial statements from April 01, 2014. The three years from 2014 were about to be completed only on 31 March 2017 but the date for filing of annual financial returns for the said years was 30 October 2017. The court thus, director the MCA to reactivate the DINs of the directors and allowed them to file their financial statement of their defaulting company from 2011 to 2016.”

This case paved the way for other directors to file for relief in the High Court if they want to remove disqualification without the revival of their company. Even after the CODS was over, filing of the Writ petition to remove directors’ disqualification is still the proven way to end the exile for directors. 

Ways in which Directors Can Seek Relief from Disqualification

During the initial few years of introduction of the new Companies Act, there were about 2.4 companies that were axed by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA) using the Companies Act in 2017. These companies started exploring the options for their revival and the directors hoped to get their DIN reactivated. When the MCA came up with the Condonation of Delay Scheme 2018, the company’s directors hoped to get their company revived without paying heavy penalties and apply for their disqualification removal.

It is the responsibility of the company’s director to file all the financial details of the company with the Ministry of Corporate Affairs every year as per the Companies Act. If the directors fail to submit these details for three consecutive years, then the Ministry could go on to remove the company from RoC and deactivate its directors’ DIN for five years. In the year 2018, the Central Government came up with Condonation of Delay Scheme (CODS) where directors could file the relevant document to get their DINs reactivated. The scheme involved the payment of a moderate fee and condonation of hefty penalties due to defaulting on a payment. Many companies at that time used this scheme for revival and removal of directors’ disqualification. This is how this scheme worked:

• The disqualified directors were needed to submit all the statutory document with the RoC to get their DIN activated temporarily.
• The documents are submitted with the statutory fee prescribed in Section 403 of the Companies Act. 
• The small fee needed was only 30000 Rs. With an e-CODS form and so saved companies form hefty penalties. 

Present Day Remedies for relief

There were many directors and company owners who could not get advantage from CODS Scheme to revive their business and thus, their directors also missed the chance at the revival of their careers. The directors’ who failed to use this scheme for the removal of disqualification were left with two options.  

• Apply in the National Companies Law Tribunal and hope to get company revival order. Once the company was revived, they could apply for the removal of their disqualification and reactivation of DIN. In this case, when the NCLT passed the order of company revival, then RoC used to verify this order and relevant documents of the directors. This procedure could only be followed if the owners of the companies wanted to revive it. 
• The other option for directors who just wanted to activate their DIN without applying for the revival of their company was to apply for removal of disqualification in the respective High Court through a Writ Petition. The option of writing a Writ Petition to High court is attributed to constitutional rights conferred by Article 226 of the constitution to seek relief. 

How to Create a Writ Petition?

1. The disqualified director must undertake to use his constitutional right to file the Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution in the respective High Court. The High Court should be chosen according to the area of jurisdiction of the company. In the application, the petitioner should include the following information,

• List of date and events of disqualification.
• Affix an urgent application with a Notice of Motion. 
• Should give reasonable justification to court for not filing the statutory documents that led to the disqualification of company and removal of its name from RoC. 
• Inform Court about the current status of the company and its directors seeking relief. 
• List out the companies in which the petitioner is serving as a director. 
• File a copy of the impugned Press Release or Notice issued by the RoC that lists out the names of the disqualified directors. 
• Personal information such as name address and designation of each Memo of parties should be mentioned in the petition. 
• A prayer cause should be attached to dismiss the publication issued by the RoC under Companies Act’s Section 164 (2).

2. After this, the High Court issues orders after hearing the option for reactivation of the DIN of directors. The directors need to file the copy of the order and all other statutory documents to the RoC to continue with the process p0f registration. 
3. Once the defaulter petitioner fulfils all the required documents and completes payment of all the penalties, the RoC will start the process of reactivation. 

Hire an Experienced Representative 

Taking legal help to file a Writ Petition in the High Court is necessary considering the technicalities involved in the process. There are lots of details that should be considered before drafting the petition and only an experienced professional can handle this kind of job. Also, an expert professional from a legal firm will not only help you in the filing of the petition but also help in representing your case in the Court. An advocate from a reputed firm will attend all the hearing of the Court and put arguments effectively to ask for relief from disqualification. Once the Court grants a favourable order, the expert will help you in following the complete procedure mentioned in the order. He will also help you file all the necessary documents in RoC before activation of DIN. 

If you are worried about the outcome of filing a Writ petition in high Court or confused whether it will bring positive results, then this should serve as good news to you. There have been many instances across High Courts from all over the country where director’s disqualification has been removed after hearing on Writ petition filed by them. The judiciary has granted interim relief to many directors and, quashed orders of RoC in some cases. 

The Court is in general agreement with the aggrieved petitioners on the following points:

• Retrospective Application of Companies Act: In some cases, the Court also found the act being applied retrospectively for disqualification of directors. The Courts deemed this kind of application of act as unjustified. 
• Contradictory Provisions in the Previous and New Act: The High Court finds it objectionable that the provisions of the Companies Act of 1956 did not have these regulations for the private companies and their directors, and so the new Act should not impose it on them in 2017.
• Order of RoC is Against Natural Justice: In most cases of directors’ disqualification, the aggrieved petitioners have mentioned that they never got any notice regarding their removal from RoC before the orders. Therefore, they never had a chance to clarify to RoC why they were not able to meet all the compliance standards of RoC. This is against the constitutional right of any individual as it doesn’t allow one person to show the cause of their actions and passes the order unilaterally. 

So, you can safely assume that the judiciary generally gives a favourable decision to directors who give valid reasons for defaulting. This should serve as a ray of hope for disqualified directors who are sceptical of filing writ petition for disqualification removal of their directorship. Just select an experienced legal firm that can represent your case efficiently and hope for a positive outcome.  

The post 5 Reasons Why Removal of Directors’ Disqualification is Necessary appeared first on MUDS.

• On what grounds directors are disqualified from the organisation?
• Hyderabad High Court’s perspective on such cases
• What was the impact of these new provisions in the act?
• What are the remedies for disqualified directors?

We will also understand the process of removal of a director from the perspective of a directors’ disqualification removal case in Hyderabad High Court. This will help us understand the general viewpoint od judiciary on cases related to the removal of directors’ disqualification. 

Different Grounds for Directors’ Disqualification

The Companies Act of 2013 required companies to furnish documents related to their finances and operations every year. Defaulting on submission of these documents for a continuous period of three years had stricter provisions of punishment compared to the previous version of Companies Act. The act considered the director of the company responsible for actions of the company and so, has a policy of strict actions against them in case their company defaults. 

The directors of the company are responsible for the smooth operation of the company and therefore they are responsible for any action taken by the company that leads to failure in complying with the directions of Government. The following points will give information on rules or issues which can lead to directors’ disqualification,

• Any directors of the company who has been convicted under section 188 by the Court regarding party transections during last five years. 
• If the directors fail to inform about their respective shares in any company held by them alone or in collaboration. 
• If any director has applied for his/her adjudication as an insolvent or if the directors’ application for the same is still pending. 
• If the director is convicted in any offence by the Court and sentenced to imprisonment for more than 6 months.
• If the organisation fails to redeem any debentures on their due date or fails to pay the interest due.
• If the company of the director has not filed its financial statements and annual returns for three years consecutively. 
• If the company has failed to repay the deposit made to it or pay interest on those deposits. 
• Failure to pay the declared dividend and continuing so for one year or more could also lead to disqualification of the company’s director. 

• If any Court confirms that the director is not of sound mind. 
• The Court also has the authority over the disqualification of directors’ who are undischarged insolvent. 
• If any court or tribunal has earlier ordered the disqualification of the director. 

Analysis of Hyderabad High Court’s Order 

Ever since the norms for director disqualification have come into place the high Court’s throughout India are using flurry of writ petitions being filed for relief. Let’s understand how filing these Petitions have helped the petitioners in their cases through a case study of M/s. Dr Reddy’s Research Foundation & Ors. Vs. The Ministry of Corporate Affairs & Anr. 

“In this case, it was argued by the sides that the action of disqualification was considered due to non-filing of financial statements from April 01, 2014. The three years from 2014 were about to be completed only on 31 March 2017 but the date for filing of annual financial returns for the said years was 30 October 2017. The court thus, director the MCA to reactivate the DINs of the directors and allowed them to file their financial statement of their defaulting company from 2011 to 2016.”

This case paved the way for other directors to file for relief in the High Court if they want removal of director disqualification without the revival of their company. Even after the CODS was over, filing of the Writ petition to remove directors’ disqualification is still the proven way to end the exile for directors. 

Ways in which Directors Can Seek Relief from Disqualification

During the initial few years of introduction of the new Companies Act, there were about 2.4 companies that were axed by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA) using the Companies Act in 2017. These companies started exploring the options for their revival and the directors hoped to get their DIN reactivated. When the MCA came up with the Condonation of Delay Scheme 2018, the company’s directors hoped to get their company revived without paying heavy penalties and apply for their disqualification removal.

It is the responsibility of the company’s director to file all the financial details of the company with the Ministry of Corporate Affairs every year as per the Companies Act. If the directors fail to submit these details for three consecutive years, then the Ministry could go on to remove the company from RoC and deactivate its directors’ DIN for five years. In the year 2018, the Central Government came up with Condonation of Delay Scheme (CODS) where directors could file the relevant document to get their DINs reactivated. The scheme involved the payment of a moderate fee and condonation of hefty penalties due to defaulting on a payment. Many companies at that time used this scheme for revival and removal of director disqualification. This is how this scheme worked:

• The disqualified directors were needed to submit all the statutory document with the RoC to get their DIN activated temporarily.
• The documents are submitted with the statutory fee prescribed in Section 403 of the Companies Act. 
• The small fee needed was only 30000 Rs. With an e-CODS form and so saved companies form hefty penalties. 

Present Day Remedies for relief

There were many directors and company owners who could not get advantage from CODS Scheme to revive their business and thus, their directors also missed the chance at the revival of their careers. The directors’ who failed to use this scheme for the removal of director disqualification were left with two options.  

• Apply in the National Companies Law Tribunal and hope to get company revival order. Once the company was revived, they could apply for the removal of their disqualification and reactivation of DIN. In this case, when the NCLT passed the order of company revival, then RoC used to verify this order and relevant documents of the directors. This procedure could only be followed if the owners of the companies wanted to revive it. 
• The other option for directors who just wanted to activate their DIN without applying for the revival of their company was to apply for removal of director disqualification in the respective High Court through a Writ Petition. The option of writing a Writ Petition to High court is attributed to constitutional rights conferred by Article 226 of the constitution to seek relief. 

How to Create a Writ Petition?

1. The disqualified director must undertake to use his constitutional right to file the Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution in the respective High Court. The High Court should be chosen according to the area of jurisdiction of the company. In the application, the petitioner should include the following information,

• List of date and events of disqualification.
• Affix an urgent application with a Notice of Motion. 
• Should give reasonable justification to court for not filing the statutory documents that led to the disqualification of company and removal of its name from RoC. 
• Inform Court about the current status of the company and its directors seeking relief. 
• List out the companies in which the petitioner is serving as a director. 
• File a copy of the impugned Press Release or Notice issued by the RoC that lists out the names of the disqualified directors. 
• Personal information such as name address and designation of each Memo of parties should be mentioned in the petition. 
• A prayer cause should be attached to dismiss the publication issued by the RoC under Companies Act’s Section 164 (2).

2. After this, the High Court issues orders after hearing the option for reactivation of the DIN of directors. The directors need to file the copy of the order and all other statutory documents to the RoC to continue with the process p0f registration. 
3. Once the defaulter petitioner fulfils all the required documents and completes payment of all the penalties, the RoC will start the process of reactivation. 

Hire an Experienced Representative for Removal of Director Disqualification

Taking legal help to file a Writ Petition in the High Court is necessary considering the technicalities involved in the process. There are lots of details that should be considered before drafting the petition and only an experienced professional can handle this kind of job. Also, an expert professional from a legal firm will not only help you in the filing of the petition but also help in representing your case in the Court. An advocate from a reputed firm will attend all the hearing of the Court and put arguments effectively to ask for relief from disqualification. Once the Court grants a favourable order, the expert will help you in following the complete procedure mentioned in the order. He will also help you file all the necessary documents in RoC before activation of DIN. 

If you are worried about the outcome of filing a Writ petition in high Court or confused whether it will bring positive results, then this should serve as good news to you. There have been many instances across High Courts from all over the country where director’s disqualification has been removed after hearing on Writ petition filed by them. The judiciary has granted interim relief to many directors and, quashed orders of RoC in some cases. 

The Court is in general agreement with the aggrieved petitioners on the following points:

• Retrospective Application of Companies Act: In some cases, the Court also found the act being applied retrospectively for disqualification of directors. The Courts deemed this kind of application of act as unjustified. 
• Contradictory Provisions in the Previous and New Act: The High Court finds it objectionable that the provisions of the Companies Act of 1956 did not have these regulations for the private companies and their directors, and so the new Act should not impose it on them in 2017.
• Order of RoC is Against Natural Justice: In most cases of directors’ disqualification, the aggrieved petitioners have mentioned that they never got any notice regarding their removal from RoC before the orders. Therefore, they never had a chance to clarify to RoC why they were not able to meet all the compliance standards of RoC. This is against the constitutional right of any individual as it doesn’t allow one person to show the cause of their actions and passes the order unilaterally. 

So, you can safely assume that the judiciary generally gives a favourable decision to directors who give valid reasons for defaulting. This should serve as a ray of hope for disqualified directors who are sceptical of filing writ petition for disqualification removal of their directorship. Just select an experienced legal firm that can represent your case efficiently and hope for a positive outcome.  

The post Can Director Disqualification Due to Non-Filing of Financial Statement be Removed? appeared first on MUDS.

Definition of a Director

Under the Companies Act, 2013, a ‘director’ is one who is appointed as a director to the Board of a company.

Main Responsibilities of a Director

The Board of Directors is primarily accountable for:

• the appointment of senior management;
• deciding and shaping the company’s strategies & objectives;
• governing & guiding the company towards achieving its aim;
• company’s accounts and finances, etc.

Minimum Number of Directors Required In Various Companies:

1. One Person Company:- One Director
2. Private Ltd. Company:- Two Directors
3. Public Ltd. Company:- Three Directors

Classification of Directors

1. Residential Director

Section 149(3) of the Companies Act, 2013, states that every company shall have at least one director who has stayed in India for a total period of not less than 182 days in the previous calendar year.

2. Independent Director

According to Section 149(6), an independent director is a director other than a Managing Director or Whole Time Director or Nominee Director. According to Rule 4 of Companies (Appointment and qualifications of Directors) Rules, 2013, the following type of companies have to appoint a minimum of 2 independent directors:

• Public Companies which have paid-up share capital of Rs.10 Crores or more;
• Public Companies which have a turnover of Rs.100 Crores or more;
• Public Companies which have total outstanding loans, debenture, and deposits of Rs. 50 Crores or more.

3. Additional Director

As per Section 161(1) of the Companies Act, 2013, any Individual can be appointed as an Additional Director by a company.

4. Alternate Director

As per Section 161 (2) of the Act, an alternate Director can be appointed by a company, if its articles confer such power to it or if a resolution is passed; in eventuality if a director is absent for more than three months from India.

This appointment comes with certain clauses:

• An alternate director shall not hold office longer than the term of the director in whose place he has been appointed;
• Such a director shall vacate the office as and when the original director returns to India.

5. Women Director

According to Section 149 (1) (a) of the Companies Act, there are certain companies that should have at least one woman as a director on their Board.

Such companies are:-

1. A listed company, or
2. Any public company having

• a turnover of Rs. 300 crore or more, or
• paid-up capital of Rs. 100 crore or more.

6. Small Shareholders Director

All listed companies may have one small shareholders director that means a director elected by people possessing shares of nominal value.

The Act mandates that such listed companies may by notice to not less than a thousand or one-tenth of the total shareholders, whichever is lower, shall appoint one small shareholder’s director.

7. Shadow Director

A Shadow Director is a person who is not actually appointed as a director but on whose directions the board is accustomed to act, and can be deemed to be Director of a company.

8. Nominee Director

These can be nominated by shareholders, third parties through contracts, leading public financial institutions or banks, or by the Central Government in case of mismanagement.

The qualification and disqualification of directors are enumerated in detail in the Act, and vary depending on the type of director and also whether it is a public ltd. or private ltd. entity.

One qualification that stands mandatorily for all is that only an individual can be appointed as a director; stating clearly that a firm or a corporate or an association, etc. cannot hold the office of director.

Contact MUDS For In-depth Knowledge!

Approach MUDS consultancy firm if you are looking for a revival of Struck off Company or relief for disqualified directors or any other legal tangle on which you need help.

The post Types of Directors: Qualifications & Disqualifications of Directors appeared first on MUDS.