<?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>1960 (11) TMI 46 - IN THE COURT OF APPEAL</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97771</link>
    <description>Section 209 permits compulsory acquisition of minority shares but allows the court to order otherwise; where the transferee is effectively identical in substance to the nine tenths majority (incorporated and promoted by that majority) the statutory framework contemplates an independent offeror and the court should scrutinise the transaction. Absent independent valuation evidence subjected to cross examination or an explanation of an overriding company interest, the usual deference to a large majority does not apply. The court should therefore exercise its discretion to protect the dissenting minority; the transferee is not entitled or bound to acquire on the proposed terms and the appeal is dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Nov 1960 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 16 Feb 2018 11:07:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=134828" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1960 (11) TMI 46 - IN THE COURT OF APPEAL</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97771</link>
      <description>Section 209 permits compulsory acquisition of minority shares but allows the court to order otherwise; where the transferee is effectively identical in substance to the nine tenths majority (incorporated and promoted by that majority) the statutory framework contemplates an independent offeror and the court should scrutinise the transaction. Absent independent valuation evidence subjected to cross examination or an explanation of an overriding company interest, the usual deference to a large majority does not apply. The court should therefore exercise its discretion to protect the dissenting minority; the transferee is not entitled or bound to acquire on the proposed terms and the appeal is dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Nov 1960 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97771</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>