<?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 31 - HIGH COURT OF ORISSA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97490</link>
    <description>Section 12 of the Indian Companies Act, 1913 permits court confirmation before a special resolution altering a company&#039;s registered office takes effect, and notice may be given to any person or class whose interests may be affected, including the State. Section 14 requires the court to consider the rights and interests of members and creditors, but does not limit objections to those groups alone. The court&#039;s discretion to confirm an alteration is controlled by the statutory safeguards and should be exercised only where the proposal is bona fide and for the benefit of the company as a whole. On the stated facts, the proposed shift was found not to satisfy that standard.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 16 Aug 1956 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Jan 2012 10:14:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=134548" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1956 (8) TMI 31 - HIGH COURT OF ORISSA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97490</link>
      <description>Section 12 of the Indian Companies Act, 1913 permits court confirmation before a special resolution altering a company&#039;s registered office takes effect, and notice may be given to any person or class whose interests may be affected, including the State. Section 14 requires the court to consider the rights and interests of members and creditors, but does not limit objections to those groups alone. The court&#039;s discretion to confirm an alteration is controlled by the statutory safeguards and should be exercised only where the proposal is bona fide and for the benefit of the company as a whole. On the stated facts, the proposed shift was found not to satisfy that standard.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Aug 1956 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97490</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>