<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1934 (2) TMI 18 - IN THE JUDICIAL COMMISSIONER S COURT OF SIND</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96639</link>
    <description>A scheme under Section 153 of the Companies Act, 1913 may be sanctioned where the meeting of depositors is properly convened and conducted, the affected depositors form a valid class, and the proposal reflects a genuine compromise or arrangement with mutual concession. The court treated notice of the application and ordered meeting as sufficient, accepted that conversion of deposits into debentures with extended repayment created a proper arrangement, and held that the depositors shared common rights and risks as a class. It also emphasised that the majority must act honestly and for the common advantage of the class, which was satisfied because the scheme preserved the business and offered a better prospect of recovery than liquidation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 07 Feb 1934 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 16 Mar 2012 19:36:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=133697" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1934 (2) TMI 18 - IN THE JUDICIAL COMMISSIONER S COURT OF SIND</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96639</link>
      <description>A scheme under Section 153 of the Companies Act, 1913 may be sanctioned where the meeting of depositors is properly convened and conducted, the affected depositors form a valid class, and the proposal reflects a genuine compromise or arrangement with mutual concession. The court treated notice of the application and ordered meeting as sufficient, accepted that conversion of deposits into debentures with extended repayment created a proper arrangement, and held that the depositors shared common rights and risks as a class. It also emphasised that the majority must act honestly and for the common advantage of the class, which was satisfied because the scheme preserved the business and offered a better prospect of recovery than liquidation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 Feb 1934 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96639</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>