9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Petitions for sanction of a scheme of arrangement in the nature of de-merger and transfer under Companies Act, 1956 - Listing of shares of Transferee Company - Reduction of Capital under section 100 of Companies Act - Appointed date prior to incorporation of Transferee Company - Meeting of creditors of Transferee Company. Analysis: The petitions involved two petitioner companies seeking approval for a scheme of arrangement involving the de-merger and transfer of a division from one company to another. The De-merged/Transferor company was engaged in manufacturing various equipment, while the Resulting/Transferee Company was newly promoted with the objective of taking over the division. The scheme aimed at different growth strategies and survival plans for specialized products of the companies, highlighting the advantages of the arrangement. The shareholders and creditors of the De-merged/Transferor company approved the scheme unanimously in meetings, while the shareholders of the Resulting/Transferee company provided consent letters in favor of the scheme. The petitions were advertised in newspapers and served upon the Central Government. The Regional Director raised concerns regarding listing of shares, reduction of capital, appointed date, and meeting of creditors of the Transferee Company. Regarding the listing of shares, the concern was that the unlisted company's shares might get listed without following necessary formalities. The petitioner's counsel argued that the Resulting Company would have to fulfill the formalities for listing shares as per relevant laws and regulations. The scheme's clause outlined the steps required for listing the shares, ensuring compliance with applicable laws and regulations. The reduction of capital was considered an integral part of the scheme due to the de-merger and transfer, not a standalone reduction scheme. Legal precedents were cited to support this position, emphasizing that court sanction for reduction as part of a scheme did not require compliance with separate capital reduction provisions. Similarly, the appointed date issue was addressed by referring to cases where the date was not material if the transferee company existed on the effective date of the scheme. The objections raised by the Regional Director regarding the transferee company were deemed unsustainable as the scheme adequately addressed the concerns. After considering the submissions and additional affidavits, the court was satisfied that the proposed arrangement was in the interest of the companies, members, and creditors. The prayers in the petitions were granted, and costs to the Central Government Standing Counsel were quantified and directed to be paid accordingly.
|
