<?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 (12) TMI 1068 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126969</link>
    <description>The court approved the scheme of arrangement under sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956, for the merger of three transferor companies with the petitioner/transferee company. Despite objections raised by a creditor regarding debts and procedural issues, the court found the scheme compliant with statutory requirements, financially stable, and beneficial. The court emphasized the protection of creditors&#039; and employees&#039; rights, approved the scheme, and granted it effect from April 1, 2009, subject to further High Court sanction. The objector&#039;s rights in the pending winding-up petition were preserved, and a fee of Rs. 2,500 was awarded to the counsel.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 16 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Sep 2014 19:28:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=163855" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (12) TMI 1068 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126969</link>
      <description>The court approved the scheme of arrangement under sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956, for the merger of three transferor companies with the petitioner/transferee company. Despite objections raised by a creditor regarding debts and procedural issues, the court found the scheme compliant with statutory requirements, financially stable, and beneficial. The court emphasized the protection of creditors&#039; and employees&#039; rights, approved the scheme, and granted it effect from April 1, 2009, subject to further High Court sanction. The objector&#039;s rights in the pending winding-up petition were preserved, and a fee of Rs. 2,500 was awarded to the counsel.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126969</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>