https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111517 The court rejected the petition for sanctioning the scheme of compromise/arrangement under sections 391 and 393 of the Companies Act, 1956, due to substantial objections raised by HUDCO regarding non-disclosure of material facts, discrimination between creditors, unfair means to obtain a majority vote, and oppressive nature of the scheme. The court found discrepancies in the scheme, including preferential treatment to certain creditors, lack of disclosure of legal proceedings, potential manipulation of the voting process, and unjust sacrifices required from secured creditors. The court emphasized fairness and compliance with statutory procedures, ultimately denying the petition. en-us Mon, 19 Feb 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 23 Apr 2012 18:12:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111517 The court rejected the petition for sanctioning the scheme of compromise/arrangement under sections 391 and 393 of the Companies Act, 1956, due to substantial objections raised by HUDCO regarding non-disclosure of material facts, discrimination between creditors, unfair means to obtain a majority vote, and oppressive nature of the scheme. The court found discrepancies in the scheme, including preferential treatment to certain creditors, lack of disclosure of legal proceedings, potential manipulation of the voting process, and unjust sacrifices required from secured creditors. The court emphasized fairness and compliance with statutory procedures, ultimately denying the petition. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 19 Feb 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111517