<?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>2007 (11) TMI 405 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111977</link>
    <description>The court sanctioned the scheme of arrangement for the demerger of the smelter division, as per sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956. The scheme, approved by shareholders, involved transferring the division from the demerged company to the resulting company to enhance value and competitiveness. Compliance with the Companies Act was ensured, with the court addressing objections raised by the Regional Director regarding name changes. The court found the objections adequately addressed, deeming the scheme beneficial for both companies and shareholders, and granted the petitions as prayed for, awarding a fee to the senior panel counsel from each petitioner-company.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 13 Nov 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Dec 2014 09:19:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=148993" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (11) TMI 405 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111977</link>
      <description>The court sanctioned the scheme of arrangement for the demerger of the smelter division, as per sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956. The scheme, approved by shareholders, involved transferring the division from the demerged company to the resulting company to enhance value and competitiveness. Compliance with the Companies Act was ensured, with the court addressing objections raised by the Regional Director regarding name changes. The court found the objections adequately addressed, deeming the scheme beneficial for both companies and shareholders, and granted the petitions as prayed for, awarding a fee to the senior panel counsel from each petitioner-company.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Nov 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111977</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>