<?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>1947 (3) TMI 20 - HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96952</link>
    <description>The power to direct the calling of a company general meeting depends on whether a valid meeting can be convened in the manner required by the company&#039;s articles, subject only to any mandatory statutory inconsistency. The wider statutory time-limit for annual meetings does not automatically displace the articles. In this setting, the Court may also examine incidentally whether an alleged earlier meeting was valid, because that question bears directly on whether calling a fresh valid meeting had become impracticable. Applying these principles, the District Judge&#039;s jurisdiction under section 79(3) was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 05 Mar 1947 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 13 Jan 2012 13:27:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=134010" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1947 (3) TMI 20 - HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96952</link>
      <description>The power to direct the calling of a company general meeting depends on whether a valid meeting can be convened in the manner required by the company&#039;s articles, subject only to any mandatory statutory inconsistency. The wider statutory time-limit for annual meetings does not automatically displace the articles. In this setting, the Court may also examine incidentally whether an alleged earlier meeting was valid, because that question bears directly on whether calling a fresh valid meeting had become impracticable. Applying these principles, the District Judge&#039;s jurisdiction under section 79(3) was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Mar 1947 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96952</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>