https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103328 The Gujarat HC held that in a scheme-sanction petition under sections 391 and 394 of the Companies Act, the company court may examine ancillary issues that directly affect whether the scheme has the required statutory majority, including the legality and voting effect of disputed share allotments. It found that allotments to NOCIL and the excess allotment to Shushrupad were made in breach of the temporary injunction governing the rights issue. Shares allotted in conscious breach of that injunction could not confer a valid right to participate in the shareholders' meeting or be counted toward the majority for scheme approval, because a party cannot derive legal benefit from disobedience of a court order. en-us Fri, 12 Jul 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 12 Apr 2019 14:32:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103328 The Gujarat HC held that in a scheme-sanction petition under sections 391 and 394 of the Companies Act, the company court may examine ancillary issues that directly affect whether the scheme has the required statutory majority, including the legality and voting effect of disputed share allotments. It found that allotments to NOCIL and the excess allotment to Shushrupad were made in breach of the temporary injunction governing the rights issue. Shares allotted in conscious breach of that injunction could not confer a valid right to participate in the shareholders' meeting or be counted toward the majority for scheme approval, because a party cannot derive legal benefit from disobedience of a court order. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 12 Jul 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103328