Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + HC Companies Law - 2010 (5) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2010 (5) TMI 386 - HC - Companies LawAmalgamation scheme - Held that - proposed scheme of arrangement/amalgamation of respective Transferor-Companies i.e., (i) Aakaar Leasing and Construction Pvt. Ltd. (ii) Giriraj Enterprise Pvt. Ltd. and (iii) Landmark Structures Pvt. Ltd. with the petitioner of Company Petition No. 186 of 2009 i.e., M.T. Shroff Finance Pvt. Ltd. (Transferee-Company) is hereby sanctioned and approved and prayer in terms of paragraph No. 16(a) in respective petitions are hereby granted on conditions that proposed new name of the Transferee-Company shall be allowed subject to availability of the same. The Transferee-Company to comply with the provisions of sections 21 and 23 of the Companies Act, 1956 in respect of the changing of the necessary forms with the Registrar of Companies. Transferee-Company to change its object clause suitably as per provisions of Companies Act, 1956 and on sanctioning of the scheme. The change be notified to the RBI also. It is ordered that appointed date for sanctioning of the scheme shall be 16-5-2010.
Issues Involved:
1. Sanctioning the proposed scheme of amalgamation of multiple companies. 2. Compliance with regulatory requirements for name change and object clause amendment. 3. Appointment of the 'appointed date' for the scheme. 4. Assessment of objections raised by the Regional Director and Official Liquidator. 5. Preservation of records and books of the company. Issue 1: Sanctioning the Proposed Scheme of Amalgamation The High Court of Gujarat heard Company Petition No. 186 of 2009 filed by M.T. Shroff Finance Pvt. Ltd. for the amalgamation of Aakaar Leasing and Construction Pvt. Ltd., Giriraj Enterprise Pvt. Ltd., and Landmark Structures Pvt. Ltd. The court dispensed with the meetings of equity shareholders as consent letters were provided. Notices were issued to the Regional Director and Official Liquidator, with no objections received. The court approved the scheme, subject to conditions, including changing the name of the transferee company. Issue 2: Compliance with Regulatory Requirements The Regional Director raised objections regarding compliance with regulations for the name change, object clause amendment, and notifying the RBI. The court directed the transferee company to file the scheme with the RBI, comply with Companies Act sections for name change, and amend the object clause as required by law. The appointed date for the scheme was set as 16-5-2010. Issue 3: Appointment of the 'Appointed Date' The court considered the specific order regarding the 'appointed date' mentioned in a previous order and fixed it for 16-5-2010. This decision was based on the submissions made by the respective parties and the satisfaction that the amalgamation would benefit the companies and their stakeholders. Issue 4: Assessment of Objections The objections raised by the Regional Director were addressed by ensuring compliance with regulatory provisions and notifying relevant authorities. The court found that apart from the objections raised, the scheme was not prejudicial to the interests of shareholders and the public, leading to the approval of the amalgamation. Issue 5: Preservation of Records The Official Liquidator's reports indicated that the companies' affairs were conducted in a non-prejudicial manner. The court directed the respondent company to preserve its books, papers, and records for eight years from the date of scheme sanctioning, with no disposal without prior permission. Costs were imposed on the petitioner and the Official Liquidator for the disposal of the petitions. This detailed analysis covers the comprehensive judgment issued by the High Court of Gujarat regarding the scheme of amalgamation and the necessary compliance and directions associated with the process.
|