When technology becomes weapon
MCA portal was to help corporates. But in private companies, it is used to fight board battles. Uploading director appointment or resignation forms takes minutes. Removal takes months through CLB. In the meantime, third parties see conflicting records. This creates chaos in banking, tenders and compliance.
Facts showing real time problem
Promoter "A" built company. "B" and "C" came in as investors and directors. After exit of others, board had only "A", "B", "C". Dispute started. "B & C" majority on board flooded MCA with forms appointing relatives. "A" in control also filed forms. Both sides claim legitimacy. "B & C" go to CLB under 397/398. CLB gives interim relief. "A" wants fake forms removed but cannot file oppression without risking winding up. Company is stuck.
Impact on 397 398 proceedings
Once form is on portal, CLB must address it. But cases involve disputed facts, so delay is inevitable. Presence of form itself is used as evidence. Functioning halts. Investors lose confidence. Both majority and minority are in trouble because portal shows conflicting data. In many cases both sides have some illegality, so nobody has clean hands to approach confidently.
What needs to change urgently
Mca portal misuse oppression mismanagement private company is 2010 reality. ROC should not advise company to go to CLB for every apparent fake filing. Need summary procedure to freeze and remove fictitious forms. CLB needs power for interim direction on record without deciding merits. Penalties for false filing must be strict. Else technology meant for ease will destroy trust.
Conclusion
Fictitious forms are bigger challenge now. They double responsibility of CLB. MCA scheme must add safeguards: verification, digital signatures, and quick grievance redressal. Without this, 397/398 will be used not for protection but for corporate sabotage. Government must act before more companies suffer.
