TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Approval of Amalgamation Scheme for Realty Companies under Companies Act</h1> <h3>Safal Realty (P.) Ltd., In re</h3> Safal Realty (P.) Ltd., In re - [2010] 98 SCL 39 (GUJ.) Issues:Petitions filed for sanction of scheme of arrangement for amalgamation under Companies Act, 1956.Analysis:The judgment involves petitions filed by three petitioner-companies seeking approval for the scheme of arrangement to merge two transferor-companies with a transferee-company under sections 391 and 394 of the Companies Act, 1956. All companies are part of the same management group and operate in the realty sector. The rationale behind the amalgamation is to achieve synergic advantages by consolidating operations, benefiting from economies of scale, streamlining administration, enhancing financial strength, and gaining a competitive edge in the market through increased product range and distribution network.The petitions detail the dispensation of meetings for equity shareholders and creditors of the transferor and transferee companies based on written consent letters. Public notices were duly advertised in newspapers, and objections were invited, but none were raised. The Official Liquidator observed that the companies' affairs were not conducted prejudicially. The Central Government was served notices, and issues raised by the Regional Director regarding fees, stamp duty, and share capital transfer were addressed in affidavits filed by company representatives.After considering submissions from the petitioner-companies' advocate and the Assistant Solicitor General representing the Central Government, the court found the scheme of arrangement to be in the interest of the companies, members, and creditors. The prayers in the petitions were granted, and costs to the Central Government standing counsel were quantified and directed to be paid accordingly. The judgment concludes by disposing of the petitions and finalizing the cost payment details.
TaxTMI 