<?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>2010 (4) TMI 608 - HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113352</link>
    <description>Cancellation of an NBFC registration did not, by itself, justify winding up where the company had an alternative commercial object, had begun recovering dues, and was repaying creditors; the High Court therefore rejected the Reserve Bank of India&#039;s winding-up petition. The proposed compromise and arrangement was also sanctioned because the statutory meetings were properly convened, the material facts were disclosed, and the scheme secured overwhelming approval from shareholders and creditors. The court declined to override the commercial wisdom of the majority, found no conflict with law or public policy, and treated the arrangement as workable, fair and beneficial, subject to modifications and safeguards for repayment and supervision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 Apr 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Oct 2014 17:19:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=150358" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (4) TMI 608 - HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113352</link>
      <description>Cancellation of an NBFC registration did not, by itself, justify winding up where the company had an alternative commercial object, had begun recovering dues, and was repaying creditors; the High Court therefore rejected the Reserve Bank of India&#039;s winding-up petition. The proposed compromise and arrangement was also sanctioned because the statutory meetings were properly convened, the material facts were disclosed, and the scheme secured overwhelming approval from shareholders and creditors. The court declined to override the commercial wisdom of the majority, found no conflict with law or public policy, and treated the arrangement as workable, fair and beneficial, subject to modifications and safeguards for repayment and supervision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Apr 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113352</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>