<?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>1956 (8) TMI 24 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97436</link>
    <description>A director is disqualified from voting only where a contract or arrangement creates a personal interest conflicting with duty to the company. Construing section 91B(1) with section 91A of the Indian Companies Act, 1913, the Court held that the prohibition applies to transactions involving personal gain or conflict, not to ordinary corporate management. A board resolution authorising directors to operate company banking arrangements was treated as a normal delegation of managerial power, not an interested arrangement. The resolutions therefore did not attract section 91B(1), no contravention was made out, and the acquittal was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 22 Aug 1956 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Jan 2012 17:02:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=134494" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1956 (8) TMI 24 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97436</link>
      <description>A director is disqualified from voting only where a contract or arrangement creates a personal interest conflicting with duty to the company. Construing section 91B(1) with section 91A of the Indian Companies Act, 1913, the Court held that the prohibition applies to transactions involving personal gain or conflict, not to ordinary corporate management. A board resolution authorising directors to operate company banking arrangements was treated as a normal delegation of managerial power, not an interested arrangement. The resolutions therefore did not attract section 91B(1), no contravention was made out, and the acquittal was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 Aug 1956 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97436</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>