Section 167: Vacation of office of director

Companies Act • Official Statutory Text & Practice Guide

Statutory Regulation
Legal Standard
Competent Court / Tribunal
Act 2013
Statutory Defined Terms in this Section: (Click any term for official legal definition)

Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 167

Section 167 specifies the statutory triggers resulting in the automatic and immediate vacation of office of a director, including disqualification under Section 164 and continuous absence from board meetings.

  • Sub-Section (2) Provision: Sub-section (2) prescribes severe criminal penalties (up to one year imprisonment.
  • Penal Consequences & Liability: Fine up to five lakh rupees) for functioning as a director knowing that his office has become vacant.
Key Landmark Precedents:
  • Mukut Pathak v. Union of India 2019 SCC OnLine Del 11059: The High Court affirmed that vacation of office under Section 167(1)(a) operates automatically by statutory operation upon incurring disqualification under Section 164(2), requiring the director to demit office immediately.
  • Girish Kumar v. Union of India 2019 SCC OnLine Ker 4376: The High Court clarified the operation of Section 167, establishing that statutory vacation of office is designed to ensure that errant directors do not continue to exercise executive powers in commercial enterprises.
Legal Commentary:

Section 167(1)(b) contains a lethal compliance trap: continuous absence from all board meetings for twelve months—even with approved leaves of absence—results in automatic vacation of directorship. Companies cannot waive or condone this vacation in their articles. When vacation occurs, Form DIR-12 must be filed with the ROC, and any further board resolutions signed by the vacated director are null and void.