<?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 (12) TMI 421 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL, ALLAHABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335776</link>
    <description>Notice to every director is mandatory for a valid board meeting, and a resolution passed without such notice may be vulnerable to challenge; however, relief setting aside a mortgage may still be refused where the statutory time limits for challenge are not satisfied. On the directors&#039; appointments, the Companies Act, 1956 distinguishes ordinary directors from additional directors, and the board cannot use the wrong route to validate appointments. On the facts recorded, the mortgage challenge failed, while the appointment of respondents 5 to 7 as directors was treated as unauthorized and set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 27 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 Dec 2016 10:57:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=451030" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (12) TMI 421 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL, ALLAHABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335776</link>
      <description>Notice to every director is mandatory for a valid board meeting, and a resolution passed without such notice may be vulnerable to challenge; however, relief setting aside a mortgage may still be refused where the statutory time limits for challenge are not satisfied. On the directors&#039; appointments, the Companies Act, 1956 distinguishes ordinary directors from additional directors, and the board cannot use the wrong route to validate appointments. On the facts recorded, the mortgage challenge failed, while the appointment of respondents 5 to 7 as directors was treated as unauthorized and set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 27 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335776</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>