https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108245 In sanction proceedings for a scheme of arrangement under the Companies Act, 1956, the Court's role was confined to examining fairness, legality and procedural propriety. It rejected objections that shareholders were denied inspection, noting that the relevant registers, valuation report and certified documents had been made available, and that the process could not be used for a fishing inquiry. It also found the explanatory statement and notices sufficient because section 393(1)(a) requires disclosure of material interests, not every material fact, and no fraud or suppression was shown. The meeting procedure and appointment of scrutinizers were upheld, and the valuation report and share exchange ratio were not disturbed absent fraud, mala fides or manifest error. The scheme was sanctioned as fair and lawful. en-us Tue, 08 Jul 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 30 Mar 2012 16:00:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108245 In sanction proceedings for a scheme of arrangement under the Companies Act, 1956, the Court's role was confined to examining fairness, legality and procedural propriety. It rejected objections that shareholders were denied inspection, noting that the relevant registers, valuation report and certified documents had been made available, and that the process could not be used for a fishing inquiry. It also found the explanatory statement and notices sufficient because section 393(1)(a) requires disclosure of material interests, not every material fact, and no fraud or suppression was shown. The meeting procedure and appointment of scrutinizers were upheld, and the valuation report and share exchange ratio were not disturbed absent fraud, mala fides or manifest error. The scheme was sanctioned as fair and lawful. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 08 Jul 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108245