9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 1251X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... SOPARKAR, ADVOCATE FOR THE RESPONDENT : MR KSHITIJ AMIN, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT STANDING COUNSEL FOR MR DEVANG VYAS, ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA CAV ORDER 1. These are the petitions filed by two companies viz. Diamond Infrastructure Private Limited and Radiant Urja Limited, for the purpose of obtaining the sanction of this court to a Scheme of Amalgamation of Diamond Infrastructure Private Limited, the Transferor Company with Radiant Urja Limited, the Transferee Company; proposed under section 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956. 2. It has been submitted that both these companies belong to the same group of management. The Transferor Company has been engaged in the business of carrying out Real Estate Construction ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd Sandesh , Gujarati daily, both Ahmedabad editions, of 6th December 2016. The publication in the Government gazette was dispensed with, as directed in the said orders. Affidavits dated 9th December 2016, confirm the same. No one has come forward with any objections to the said petitions even after the publication and the same has been further confirmed by the additional affidavit dated 14th December 2016. 5. Notice of the petition has been served upon the Office of the Official Liquidator for the Transferor company. A report dated 13th December 2016 has been filed by the Official Liquidator after taking into account the report of the Chartered Accountant appointed by him out of the panel. It has been observed by the Official Liquidato ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vit dated 14th December 2016 filed by Mr. Jayesh Desai, the Director and Authorised Signatory of the Petitioner Transferor Company, whereby all the above issues have been dealt with. This Court has also heard the submissions advanced by the learned Central Government standing Counsel and Mrs.Swati Soparkar, learned advocate appearing for the petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that: (i) The observations made vide para 2(a), (b) and (c) contain statements of fact pertaining to jurisdiction, nature of proposal, proposed exchange ratio and purpose of the Scheme and do not require any response. (ii) The observation made vide paragraph 2 (d) of the said affidavit pertains to the issue of business of the petitione ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Income Tax Act and rules. In view of the same, no further directions are required to be issued to the petitioner companies in this regard. (iv) It has been further submitted that no complaints have been received by the Registrar of Companies, as confirmed by paragraph 2 (f). The Regional Director has vide the observation at Paragraph 2 (g) confirmed that it has no other objection except the above and further confirmed that the proposed Scheme is not prejudicial to the interest of the shareholders of the petitioner companies and the public at large. 8. Considering all the above facts and circumstances and taking into account the contentions raised by the affidavits and reply affidavits, undertakings provided vide the additional aff ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
