REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES vs MS OASIS MEDIA MATRIX LTD Advocate - R R SHARMA — 200492/2003
Case under Companies Act, 1956 Section 163. Disposed: Uncontested--LOK ADALAT on 14th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJAH220002012003
Filing Number
200492/2003
Filing Date
25-11-2003
Registration No
200492/2003
Registration Date
25-11-2003
Court
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE COURT, AHMEDABAD
Judge
2-ADDL. CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, AHMEDABAD CITY
Decision Date
14th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--LOK ADALAT
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
MS OASIS MEDIA MATRIX LTD Advocate - R R SHARMA
MR. HITESH M. PATEL
MOHANBHAI F PATEL
JIGNESH A RAWAL
KALPESH A RAVAL
MAHENRBHAI P SHAH
KILLOI V SHELAT
LALITKUMAR JOSHI
RAKESH PATEL
CHANDRKANT B MAHETA
Adv. R R SHARMA
VARSHABEN J SHAH
Adv. R R SHARMA
LAMLESH H SHAH
Adv. R R SHARMA
PRAKASH V SHAH
Adv. R R SHARMA
PANKAJ J SHAH
Adv. R R SHARMA
Hearing History
Judge: 2-ADDL. CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, AHMEDABAD CITY
Disposed
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 14-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 11-03-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
| 10-02-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
| 31-12-2025 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
| 30-09-2025 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
Final Orders / Judgements
The court convicted the accused under the Companies Act, 1956 for violating Section 173 and sentenced him to a fine of ₹11,947 (with imprisonment of 10 days as default punishment). The judgment noted this was the accused's first offense and considered showing leniency while maintaining justice, as the accused had voluntarily pleaded guilty and expressed remorse. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
The court convicted the accused under the Companies Act, 1956 for violating Section 173 and sentenced him to a fine of ₹11,947 (with imprisonment of 10 days as default punishment). The judgment noted this was the accused's first offense and considered showing leniency while maintaining justice, as the accused had voluntarily pleaded guilty and expressed remorse. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts