https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273903 Decree-holders who remained unsecured creditors were treated as part of the same class for a scheme of arrangement under Section 153 of the Companies Act, so no separate meeting was required for them. The court held that the 1936 amendment was merely explanatory of the earlier provision and therefore declaratory of the existing law, not a new rule. On that basis, the scheme validly bound the decree-holders, and the objection to execution was correctly upheld. en-us Thu, 26 Feb 1942 00:00:00 +0630 Thu, 19 Jul 2018 10:36:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273903 Decree-holders who remained unsecured creditors were treated as part of the same class for a scheme of arrangement under Section 153 of the Companies Act, so no separate meeting was required for them. The court held that the 1936 amendment was merely explanatory of the earlier provision and therefore declaratory of the existing law, not a new rule. On that basis, the scheme validly bound the decree-holders, and the objection to execution was correctly upheld. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 26 Feb 1942 00:00:00 +0630 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273903