Section 213 of the Companies Act, 2013 is important in ensuring that the corporate world is transparent and answerable. This provision gives authority to the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) to order an inquiry in the affairs of a company if there is any basis for suspicion of fraud, mismanagement, or even unfair practices. This section allows for a detailed analysis so that the companies perform in an ethical manner, and thus, an environment of trust is developed between shareholders and the public at large. The scope, applicability, and importance of Section 213 have been discussed below, indicating the role of this provision towards corporate governance and stakeholder interests.
Objective and Scope of Section 213
Section 213 of the Companies Act, 2013 aims at bringing ethical management, accountability, and transparency into the company's operations. Under the law, the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) is authorized to inquire into the affairs of a company if grave doubts arise with respect to fraud, mismanagement, or any unethical practice affecting the shareholders and other stakeholders. Through this section, the Act provides a cause of action to the members or third parties who feel that the business of the company is done with an intention to deceive or act illegally.
Detail breakdown of Section 213 of the Companies Act 2013
Section 213 provides NCLT with the powers to seek investigations into the affairs of a company on specific grounds. Investigations by NCLT are carried out based on applications filed by members or other stakeholders of a company. The main objective behind this power is to safeguard the interests of its members and creditors so that companies operate in an open and honest manner.
1. Application for Investigation
Section 213 allows the NCLT to order an investigation into a company's affairs if certain conditions are met. The application for such an investigation can be made in two ways:
(a) Application by Members
For Companies with Share Capital: The application must be made by at least 100 members or members holding not less than 10% of the total voting power.
For Companies without Share Capital: The application must be made by at least one-fifth of the members on the company's register.
Evidence Requirement: The application must be backed by sufficient evidence to prove that the applicants have legitimate reasons to request an investigation.
(b) Application by Other Persons or on Tribunal’s Own Motion
Any other person may apply to the NCLT, or the Tribunal may act on its own accord if there are reasonable grounds for an investigation.
2. Conditions and Grounds for Invoking Section 213
The Tribunal will consider an investigation if there is evidence of any of the following circumstances:
(i) Fraudulent or Unlawful Business Conduct
If the company's business is conducted with the intent to defraud creditors, members, or other persons.
If the company’s operations are conducted for any fraudulent or unlawful purpose.
If the business conduct is oppressive to any of its members.
If the company was formed for fraudulent or unlawful purposes.
(ii) Fraud or Misconduct by Management
If those involved in the formation or management of the company have committed fraud, misfeasance, or misconduct towards the company or its members.
(iii) Suppression of Information
If the members have not been provided with complete information about the company’s affairs, especially in areas they reasonably expect transparency, such as:
Financial affairs.
Calculation of commissions payable to directors or managers.
3. Investigation process under section 213
Right to a Hearing: Before passing an order for investigation, the NCLT must give the concerned parties a reasonable opportunity to be heard.
Appointment of Inspectors: If satisfied, the Tribunal can order that the company’s affairs be investigated by one or more inspectors.
Role of the Central Government: Following the Tribunal’s order, the Central Government appoints competent inspectors to conduct the investigation and report their findings.
4. Consequences of the Investigation
If the investigation reveals evidence of fraud or misconduct, certain legal consequences are triggered:
(i) Confirmation of Fraudulent Business Conduct
If the investigation proves that:
The business is conducted with fraudulent intent.
The company was formed for fraudulent purposes.
The company officers and persons involved in fraud are held accountable.
(ii) Legal Accountability for Fraud
Under Section 447 of the Companies Act, individuals found guilty of fraud during the investigation are subject to penalties for fraud. This can include:
Financial penalties.
Criminal charges and imprisonment.
Examples of When Section 213 Can Be Invoked
Case of Financial Misreporting:
If the members of a company feel that it has misrepresented profits or expenses to cheat its creditors, they can ask for an investigation under Section 213.
Suppression of Important Information:
Suppose a company's management conceals information about big commissions to directors from the shareholders. In such cases, shareholders can use Section 213 to demand an investigation.
Conflict of Interest in Management:
In case it is assumed that the directors are using the company for personal benefits or have indulged in self-dealing, the shareholders may request an investigation by NCLT to have them held accountable by that director.
Are you interested in pursuing a career in Law? The Legal School in collaboration with IndusLaw has created unique programs for a Certification in Mergers & Acquisitions, Private Equity and Venture Capital Laws & Certification in Mergers & Acquisitions for fresh law graduates as well as professionals looking to advance in their careers! Enquire now for details!
Recent case laws:
Neeta Shrinivas Zanvar & Ors. v. Nagarjuna Agro Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. (2021)
Facts: The NCLT directed the RoC to make an inquiry into the affairs of Nagarjuna Agro Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. and handed over the control of its joint bank account as allegations of fund mismanagement existed. The appellants were of the view that NCLT's order was a step beyond its jurisdiction as there was no evidence of actual mismanagement.
Holding: The NCLAT, while rescinding the order, declared that only the Central Government has the power of investigation pursuant to Sections 210 and 213.
Impact: This judgment has clarified the point that such investigation under Section 213 is carried out in an appropriate procedural manner. Thereby it highlights how important it is to proceed with the correct procedure to be followed for investigations in corporate affairs.
P. Rajendran v. Andhra Cements Ltd. (2021)
Facts: In this case, shareholders have alleged that the company Andhra Cements was involved in fraudulent practices that damaged the financial health of the company. On the grounds of unknown liabilities and suspicious transactions, shareholders have requested a Section 213 investigation.
Holding: NCLT passed an order for investigation based on serious irregularities and requirements of clear disclosures. This court held that the interest of shareholders in protection constitutes a valid reason to order an investigation into possible fraud.
Impact: This case holds that shareholder concerns based on hard-core evidence of financial impropriety provide sufficient justification for a Section 213 investigation in furtherance of high corporate governance standards.
S. Chandrasekaran v. Sunstar Properties Pvt. Ltd. (2020)
Facts: The minority shareholders of Sunstar Properties made the allegations of financial irregularity and lack of transparency. The appellants applied for an investigation under Section 213 on the suspicion that the directors had been making misfeasance.
Holding: The NCLT sent the matter for further investigation with a holding that the point of lack of transparency or even misuse of funds requires to be probed into.
Effect: This order reiterates the tenet that under Section 213, investigations can be resorted to for safeguarding the interests of the shareholders where there is suspicion of financial impropriety.
Tata Sons Pvt. Ltd. v. Cyrus Mistry (2019)
Facts: It is a case wherein, after the removal of Cyrus Mistry from Tata Sons, allegations of oppressive conduct and mismanagement were raised. Mistry sought investigation under Section 213 by alleging fraudulent activities prejudicial to the interest of the company.
Holding: NCLAT granted relief in favor of Mistry and suggested corporate reforms within Tata Sons to address the governance issues alleged; however, later on, the Supreme Court reversed it and stated that no prima facie fraud was proved.
Impact: This case well brings out the stringent requirement of proof of allegations before an investigation under Section 213 is ordered, especially when corporate reputation and governance structures are involved.
Know about career opportunities in companies law
In conclusion,
Section 213, under the Companies Act of 2013, is yet another important tool of corporate governance in the name of ensuring transparency and accountability in such a system. According to this provision, all the stakeholders are entitled to seek investigations and NCLT, being vested with power in this regard, can also demand investigation. In this sense, it upholds the managerial sanctity of companies' and safeguards the interests of both shareholders and creditors of companies.
FAQs related to Section 213 of the Companies Act 2013
1. What is Section 213 of the Companies Act, 2013 for?
Under Section 213, NCLT can direct an investigation of the affairs of a company where it has reason to believe that fraud, mismanagement, or other kind of misconduct has taken place. This section helps the companies be more transparent in their working and bring before law serious wrongdoings of the companies.
2. When can a Section 213 investigation be made?
An inquiry may be directed under Section 213 by the NCLT if the members constitute at least 10% of the voting rights, or fraudulent practices or mismanagement that is prejudicial to the shareholders or public interest are apparent. This again goes a long way in tracking and correcting any malpractice in the company's funds or assets.
3. Who conducts an investigation ordered under Section 213?
Investigations are conducted by Central Government-appointed inspectors, who examine the company's financial activities, its operation, and managerial practices in general so that all malpractices of this kind can be properly investigated and recorded.
4. What are the consequences of an investigation under Section 213?
If the misconduct is established, possible relief may include penalties against wrongdoers who are either directors or officers of a corporation, criminal actions against them, or rectification measures to vindicate the rights of shareholders. In all these ways, it caters to the interests of stakeholders and maintains standards regarding corporate governance.
5. How does Section 213 advance the principles of corporate governance?
Section 213 promotes openness and accountability within the company by allowing for inquired potentially unethical practices, which enhance trust among shareholders, investors, and the general public. It is the insurance against mismanagement and fraud within companies.
