<?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>2023 (6) TMI 196 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=438622</link>
    <description>The Companies Act framework permits dispensation of a creditors&#039; meeting in compromise and amalgamation proceedings where creditors representing at least ninety per cent in value consent by affidavit; on the stated facts, the sole unsecured creditor had already consented, so the meeting should have been dispensed with. The governing provisions and rules also allow voting in person or through proxy, and a direction limiting creditor voting to personal attendance was inconsistent with the prescribed procedure. The impugned order was therefore set aside and the matter remitted for reconsideration in accordance with law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 02 Jun 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Jun 2023 15:51:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=715616" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (6) TMI 196 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=438622</link>
      <description>The Companies Act framework permits dispensation of a creditors&#039; meeting in compromise and amalgamation proceedings where creditors representing at least ninety per cent in value consent by affidavit; on the stated facts, the sole unsecured creditor had already consented, so the meeting should have been dispensed with. The governing provisions and rules also allow voting in person or through proxy, and a direction limiting creditor voting to personal attendance was inconsistent with the prescribed procedure. The impugned order was therefore set aside and the matter remitted for reconsideration in accordance with law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 02 Jun 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=438622</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>