2000 (8) TMI 1035

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n the transferee-company is the applicant. By order dated 30-3-2000 the said company was ordered to convene meetings of equity shareholders and creditors for the purpose of considering and, if thought fit, to approve with or without modification the scheme of amalgamation (Annexure VII to the Company Application No. 4 of 2000 supported by the affidavit of Satyendra Prakash Joshi, Managing Director of the company) proposed to be made between the said company and Jai Prakash Investments Private Limited (transferor-company) on 7-5-2000 under the chairmanship of Sri S.D. Singh, Advocate. Sri S.D. Singh who was appointed Chairman to preside over the meetings has filed his report with his affidavit dated 10-5-2000 (Paper No. A-5 in Company Applic....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... also not raised any objection in his report No. 47 of 2000 meaning thereby that the scheme is not prejudicial to the interest of anyone. It has only been submitted by the Official Liquidator that the transferee-company should be directed to increase the authorised share capital sufficiently so as to accommodate the transferred paid-up capital of the transferor-company as per the provisions of the scheme of amalgamation and the transferor-company may be ordered to be dissolved as per section 394(1)(iv) of the Companies Act, 1956. 5. Notice was issued to the Central Government under section 394-A. The only objection raised by the regional director in his affidavit A-7 is that the exchange ratio determined in the proposed scheme of amalgam....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....o exchange ratio in the meeting held for the purpose of considering the scheme of amalgamation under the orders of this Court. A Division Bench of Calcutta High Court held in Bengal Tea Industries Ltd. v. Union of India [1989] 93 CWN 542, 566 that in the absence of any challenge from the shareholders who are primarily and exclusively interested as to the question of ratio of exchange of shares, the Court would not interfere on the question of ratio of exchange of shares at the instance of the regional director. This question stands finally settled by the view taken by the Apex Court in the case of Miheer H. Mafat Lal v. Mafat Lal Industries Ltd. [1996] 87 Comp. Cas. 792 wherein it has been held that when the ratio has been fixed by expert C....