<?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>1985 (8) TMI 297 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101296</link>
    <description>The court approved the scheme of arrangement sought by the petitioner-company, dispensed with the procedural requirements under section 101 of the Companies Act, interpreted &quot;arrangement&quot; broadly under section 391 to include adjustments of rights, and emphasized the importance of obtaining necessary approvals for debenture issuance. The court found no evidence of unfairness or prejudice to minority shareholders and directed the petitioner to pay costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 19 Aug 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 12:51:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=138346" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1985 (8) TMI 297 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101296</link>
      <description>The court approved the scheme of arrangement sought by the petitioner-company, dispensed with the procedural requirements under section 101 of the Companies Act, interpreted &quot;arrangement&quot; broadly under section 391 to include adjustments of rights, and emphasized the importance of obtaining necessary approvals for debenture issuance. The court found no evidence of unfairness or prejudice to minority shareholders and directed the petitioner to pay costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Aug 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101296</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>