9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Approval of scheme of arrangement under sections 391 and 394 of the Companies Act, 1956. 2. Transfer of unit from transferor-company to transferee-company. 3. Compliance with provisions of sections 391(4) and 394(3) of the Companies Act. 4. Binding nature of the sanctioned scheme on creditors, members, shareholders, and contributors. Analysis: 1. The judgment pertains to the approval of a scheme of arrangement under sections 391 and 394 of the Companies Act, 1956. Two different orders were passed allowing M/s. Highway Cycle Industries to present the scheme to its shareholders and creditors for corporate reconstruction and further growth. The scheme involved transferring the unit of Sunbeam Castings from the transferor-company to the transferee-company. Detailed terms and conditions were specified in the petitions, and meetings were conducted as per the orders. 2. Subsequently, Company Petition No. 136 of 1996 and Company Petition No. 12 of 1997 were filed by the transferor and transferee companies, respectively, for the sanction of the scheme under sections 391, 391(3)(4), and 394 of the Act. The meetings of creditors and shareholders approved the proposed scheme unanimously. Reports from the Regional Director indicated no prejudicial conduct in the company's affairs. The scheme was approved by the boards of directors, and the chartered accountants' reports were submitted along with a "no-objection certificate" from the lead bank. 3. The court's role in considering the scheme under sections 391 and 394 is supervisory, ensuring all relevant material is presented and the scheme benefits all stakeholders without violating public policy. Despite public notice, no objections were raised, and financial institutions consented to the arrangements. The court, based on the reports and certifications, sanctioned the scheme, making it binding on all creditors, members, shareholders, and contributors. 4. The petitioner companies were directed to comply with the provisions of sections 391(4) and 394(3) within the specified period. The sanctioned scheme was approved, and control of the unit was transferred to the transferee-company. The order required proper notification and publication in Indian Express and the Tribune. Ultimately, both petitions were allowed, and the scheme was sanctioned as proposed, ensuring compliance with the Companies Act. This detailed analysis highlights the court's considerations and actions regarding the approval and implementation of the scheme of arrangement, emphasizing compliance with legal provisions and stakeholder interests.
|
