https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96807 The articles were construed as permitting a general meeting to act within their existing machinery to vary the number of directors, so an increase from seven to eleven did not require a special resolution and was valid. The notice convening the extraordinary general meeting was not invalidated by omission of the date of receipt of the requisition, because the meeting was held within the prescribed time and the notice sufficiently informed shareholders of the business to be transacted. Reading the articles as a whole, the directors' power to appoint additional directors was not exclusive, and the company in general meeting retained competence to make such appointments unless clearly excluded by the articles. en-us Fri, 18 Aug 1939 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 16 Mar 2012 19:35:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96807 The articles were construed as permitting a general meeting to act within their existing machinery to vary the number of directors, so an increase from seven to eleven did not require a special resolution and was valid. The notice convening the extraordinary general meeting was not invalidated by omission of the date of receipt of the requisition, because the meeting was held within the prescribed time and the notice sufficiently informed shareholders of the business to be transacted. Reading the articles as a whole, the directors' power to appoint additional directors was not exclusive, and the company in general meeting retained competence to make such appointments unless clearly excluded by the articles. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 18 Aug 1939 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96807