https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109395 In sanctioning an amalgamation under Section 391 of the Companies Act, 1956, the Court emphasised that preliminary objections will not defeat the scheme unless they show material non-compliance or prejudice. Pending SEBI proceedings, civil suits, territorial jurisdiction objections, and alleged disclosure gaps were held not to justify refusal or delay because they did not materially affect the amalgamation or the voting result. The scheme was treated as fair, bona fide, commercially sound, and validly approved by the requisite majority of shareholders and creditors, with limited judicial interference in commercial wisdom. The consequential reduction of paid-up share capital was also found lawful, as it followed the amalgamation, caused no creditor prejudice, and complied with notice and special resolution requirements. en-us Wed, 10 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 09 Apr 2012 15:34:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109395 In sanctioning an amalgamation under Section 391 of the Companies Act, 1956, the Court emphasised that preliminary objections will not defeat the scheme unless they show material non-compliance or prejudice. Pending SEBI proceedings, civil suits, territorial jurisdiction objections, and alleged disclosure gaps were held not to justify refusal or delay because they did not materially affect the amalgamation or the voting result. The scheme was treated as fair, bona fide, commercially sound, and validly approved by the requisite majority of shareholders and creditors, with limited judicial interference in commercial wisdom. The consequential reduction of paid-up share capital was also found lawful, as it followed the amalgamation, caused no creditor prejudice, and complied with notice and special resolution requirements. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 10 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109395