https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103815 In sanctioning an amalgamation scheme, the Court held that overwhelming shareholder approval should not be displaced by a few objectors where both companies remained under common control and the statutory procedure was otherwise satisfied. The tenancy objection failed because transfer of monthly tenancies would occur only when the scheme became effective, making any lack of landlord consent premature. The valuation and exchange ratio were accepted as supported by recognised expert valuers and independent review, with no fraud or material error shown. Brand names were treated as part of goodwill, and the transferor's shares in the transferee were to be disposed of at the best available market price before effectiveness. en-us Mon, 09 Dec 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 24 Feb 2012 17:03:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103815 In sanctioning an amalgamation scheme, the Court held that overwhelming shareholder approval should not be displaced by a few objectors where both companies remained under common control and the statutory procedure was otherwise satisfied. The tenancy objection failed because transfer of monthly tenancies would occur only when the scheme became effective, making any lack of landlord consent premature. The valuation and exchange ratio were accepted as supported by recognised expert valuers and independent review, with no fraud or material error shown. Brand names were treated as part of goodwill, and the transferor's shares in the transferee were to be disposed of at the best available market price before effectiveness. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 09 Dec 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103815