<?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>1972 (4) TMI 55 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98972</link>
    <description>The court sanctioned the scheme of arrangement and amalgamation of two sister-companies, Union Services Private Ltd. and Union Company (Motors) Private Ltd., under sections 391 and 394 of the Companies Act, 1956. Despite the Registrar of Companies&#039; objection for the transferee-company to join as a petitioner, the court noted the unanimous shareholder support for the merger, making the transferee-company&#039;s participation unnecessary. While recognizing the statutory requirement for the transferee-company to hold a shareholder meeting, the court adjourned the petition to allow compliance, emphasizing the importance of meeting statutory obligations while acknowledging the benefits and shareholder backing for the amalgamation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 11 Apr 1972 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Jan 2012 17:11:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=136029" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1972 (4) TMI 55 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98972</link>
      <description>The court sanctioned the scheme of arrangement and amalgamation of two sister-companies, Union Services Private Ltd. and Union Company (Motors) Private Ltd., under sections 391 and 394 of the Companies Act, 1956. Despite the Registrar of Companies&#039; objection for the transferee-company to join as a petitioner, the court noted the unanimous shareholder support for the merger, making the transferee-company&#039;s participation unnecessary. While recognizing the statutory requirement for the transferee-company to hold a shareholder meeting, the court adjourned the petition to allow compliance, emphasizing the importance of meeting statutory obligations while acknowledging the benefits and shareholder backing for the amalgamation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 Apr 1972 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98972</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>