<?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>1993 (5) TMI 186 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194153</link>
    <description>In sanctioning a scheme of arrangement, the Court treated lawfully transferred shares and credits as valid for voting purposes and held that the statutory majority test under the Companies Act, 1956 must be applied practically by reference to the persons or claims represented at the meeting. On that basis, objections to the chairman&#039;s conduct, transferred interests, and isolated authorisation defects did not defeat approval. The Court also applied the settled sanction test of compliance, fair representation, commercial viability, and public interest, and accepted the modified revival scheme as adequately disclosed and bona fide. Competing schemes and procedural objections were rejected, and revival of the company was directed under supervisory control.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 28 May 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 Aug 2017 15:42:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=487457" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1993 (5) TMI 186 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194153</link>
      <description>In sanctioning a scheme of arrangement, the Court treated lawfully transferred shares and credits as valid for voting purposes and held that the statutory majority test under the Companies Act, 1956 must be applied practically by reference to the persons or claims represented at the meeting. On that basis, objections to the chairman&#039;s conduct, transferred interests, and isolated authorisation defects did not defeat approval. The Court also applied the settled sanction test of compliance, fair representation, commercial viability, and public interest, and accepted the modified revival scheme as adequately disclosed and bona fide. Competing schemes and procedural objections were rejected, and revival of the company was directed under supervisory control.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 May 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194153</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>