TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
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>Unlawful Share Issuance: Board Decision Emphasizes Corporate Governance Principles</h1> The Board found that the further issuance of shares without notifying the majority shareholder and without holding a general meeting was illegal and void ... - Issues:1. Alleged illegal issuance of shares by respondent company without notice to majority shareholder.2. Interpretation of Article 9 of Articles of Association regarding the requirement of a general meeting before issuing further shares.3. Validity of the further issuance of shares to specific respondents without notice to the petitioner.Analysis:Issue 1:The petitioners filed a petition under section 397 of the Companies Act, 1956 against the respondent company, alleging that the further issuance of 28400 shares on 16.01.2003 to respondents 2, 3, 4, and 5 without notifying the majority shareholder (petitioner No. 1) was illegal and against public interest. The petitioners contended that this action reduced their shareholding from 99.95% to 23.85%, breaching their rights as majority shareholders. The respondents argued that the shares were issued by the Board of Directors against valid applications and that there was no legal obligation to notify the petitioners. However, the petitioner emphasized that the further issuance of shares should have been regulated under Article 9 of the Articles of Association, which required a general meeting of shareholders before such an issuance.Issue 2:The interpretation of Article 9 of the Articles of Association was crucial in determining the legality of the further issuance of shares. The respondents argued that calling a general meeting of shareholders was only necessary when selling shares at a discount under specific sections of the Companies Act, 1956. On the other hand, the petitioners contended that a general meeting was mandatory before issuing further shares, emphasizing that the respondents failed to comply with this requirement. The Board found that the plain reading of Article 9 mandated holding a general meeting before allotting additional shares, rejecting the respondents' interpretation and holding them accountable for not following the correct procedure.Issue 3:The Board concluded that the further issuance of 28400 shares on 16.01.2003 without notifying the petitioner and without holding a general meeting of shareholders was illegal and void ab initio under Article 9 of the Articles of Association. The Board set aside this issuance, deeming it wrongful and void. The decision highlighted the importance of following proper procedures, especially when it comes to significant corporate actions like issuing shares. The Board directed that other prayers made in the petition could be addressed in a general meeting of the shareholders of the respondent company, emphasizing the importance of shareholder participation and adherence to corporate governance principles.In conclusion, the judgment addressed the alleged illegal issuance of shares, the interpretation of Article 9 of the Articles of Association, and the validity of the further issuance of shares without proper notification and a general meeting. The decision underscored the significance of corporate governance, shareholder rights, and adherence to the company's constitutional documents in conducting business transactions.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
