<?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>2016 (5) TMI 1110 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328129</link>
    <description>The court granted sanction for a scheme of arrangement involving the demerger of an undertaking under Sections 391 to 394 and Sections 100 to 104 read with Section 52 of the Companies Act. The court found jurisdiction to entertain the petition as both companies&#039; registered offices were in Bhopal. Compliance was ensured through the provision of necessary details, approval resolutions, and absence of pending proceedings. Approval of the scheme was obtained from shareholders, creditors, Regional Director, and Official Liquidator. Sanction was granted due to compliance and absence of objections, with directions given for share capital reduction and statutory compliance.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 May 2016 09:36:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=429740" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (5) TMI 1110 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328129</link>
      <description>The court granted sanction for a scheme of arrangement involving the demerger of an undertaking under Sections 391 to 394 and Sections 100 to 104 read with Section 52 of the Companies Act. The court found jurisdiction to entertain the petition as both companies&#039; registered offices were in Bhopal. Compliance was ensured through the provision of necessary details, approval resolutions, and absence of pending proceedings. Approval of the scheme was obtained from shareholders, creditors, Regional Director, and Official Liquidator. Sanction was granted due to compliance and absence of objections, with directions given for share capital reduction and statutory compliance.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328129</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>