https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458803 A recall of a sanctioned amalgamation scheme was refused where the challenge was brought more than two years late and the explanation for delay was unsatisfactory. The Court noted that notices had been published as directed, earlier proceedings concerning the same scheme had been pursued elsewhere, and no other shareholder had complained. It further found that the applicant's shareholding was too small to alter the meeting outcome, so even if his objections were accepted there was no material prejudice. Allegations of fraud, suppression, and procedural irregularity were therefore insufficient to unsettle the sanction order. en-us Thu, 19 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 16 Nov 2024 17:17:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458803 A recall of a sanctioned amalgamation scheme was refused where the challenge was brought more than two years late and the explanation for delay was unsatisfactory. The Court noted that notices had been published as directed, earlier proceedings concerning the same scheme had been pursued elsewhere, and no other shareholder had complained. It further found that the applicant's shareholding was too small to alter the meeting outcome, so even if his objections were accepted there was no material prejudice. Allegations of fraud, suppression, and procedural irregularity were therefore insufficient to unsettle the sanction order. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 19 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458803