https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102494 In sanctioning an amalgamation scheme, the Court ordinarily defers to the informed commercial judgment of the statutory majority and interferes only if non-compliance, unfairness, fraud, mala fides, or illegality is shown. The explanatory statement under section 393(1)(a) need only give members a clear understanding of the scheme; minor omissions do not vitiate approval absent prejudice. Share exchange ratio and valuation are technical matters and will not be disturbed without clear unfairness or fraud. The scheme need not await Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices proceedings, employee protections were treated as sufficient, preferential allotment below market price was not inherently impermissible, and allegations of mala fides or quid pro quo lacked factual support. en-us Wed, 18 May 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 15 Feb 2012 11:15:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102494 In sanctioning an amalgamation scheme, the Court ordinarily defers to the informed commercial judgment of the statutory majority and interferes only if non-compliance, unfairness, fraud, mala fides, or illegality is shown. The explanatory statement under section 393(1)(a) need only give members a clear understanding of the scheme; minor omissions do not vitiate approval absent prejudice. Share exchange ratio and valuation are technical matters and will not be disturbed without clear unfairness or fraud. The scheme need not await Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices proceedings, employee protections were treated as sufficient, preferential allotment below market price was not inherently impermissible, and allegations of mala fides or quid pro quo lacked factual support. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 18 May 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102494