<?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>1999 (9) TMI 766 - HIGH COURT OF KERALA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104247</link>
    <description>Section 45QA(2) of the Reserve Bank of India Act confers a discretionary power that must be exercised in light of the company&#039;s interests, depositors&#039; interests and public interest. A pending scheme under section 391 of the Companies Act was a relevant factor because the proposed arrangement could affect all creditors, including the depositor-applicant. The Company Law Board therefore did not decline relief on an irrelevant consideration or abdicate jurisdiction; it assessed the request in the context of the ongoing company proceeding and preserved the applicant&#039;s ability to seek recourse if the scheme was not sanctioned. The challenge to the order accordingly failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 08 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 01 Mar 2012 17:56:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=141286" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (9) TMI 766 - HIGH COURT OF KERALA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104247</link>
      <description>Section 45QA(2) of the Reserve Bank of India Act confers a discretionary power that must be exercised in light of the company&#039;s interests, depositors&#039; interests and public interest. A pending scheme under section 391 of the Companies Act was a relevant factor because the proposed arrangement could affect all creditors, including the depositor-applicant. The Company Law Board therefore did not decline relief on an irrelevant consideration or abdicate jurisdiction; it assessed the request in the context of the ongoing company proceeding and preserved the applicant&#039;s ability to seek recourse if the scheme was not sanctioned. The challenge to the order accordingly failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104247</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>