Company Petition No. 501 of 2006 · Bombay High Court · 2006
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Companies Act, 2013 ss. 391, 394
Judgment
Mr.Rajesh Shah i/by Rajesh Shah & Co. for the petitioner. Mr.C.J.Joy with R.C.Master i/by S.S.Sarkar for R.D. Mr.V.P.Vaidya for snowlion investment Pvt. Ltd., to oppose the petition. ---- Coram : R.S.Mohite,J Coram : R.S.Mohite,J Coram : R.S.Mohite,J Date : 15.09.2006. PC
Company Petition No.501 of 2006 is filed by the Pan India Network Infravest Pvt. Ltd., which is the transferee company. The transferor company is Cyquator Technologies Limited which is situated in Delhi and therefore, has filed Company Petition No.205 of 2006 in the Delhi High Court and I am informed that the same is pending. This petition has been filed for sanction of the scheme of amalgamation under Sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act 1956. Copy of the said scheme is annexed at Exhibit-G to the present petition.
It is submitted by the petitioners that they have complied with all statutory provisions. Notice : 2 : of the petition has been given to the Regional Director and the Regional Director after obtaining the report from the Registrar of the Companies has filed an affidavit dated 7.9.2006 stating that on consideration of the report of the Registrar of Companies, it is found that the scheme is not prejudicial to the interest of creditors, shareholders and public. An affidavit opposing the amalgamation dated 14.9.2006 has been filed by one M/s.Snowlion Investment Private Limited. However, Advocate appearing for the said creditor withdraws his objection subject to his right to take appropriate proceeding for recovery or winding up according to law in the Court of competent jurisdiction.
Taking into account the aforesaid facts, I find no reason to dis-allow this petition. Petition is therefore, allowed in terms of prayer clauses-(a) to (c) subject to grant of sanction of the scheme by the Delhi High Court in Company Petition No.205 of
2006. Petitioner will pay cost of Rs.2500/- to the Regional Director.
Parties to act on a copy of this order duly certified by the Company Registrar. Making up of a drawn up order is dispensed with. Petition stands disposed off. : 3 : (R.S.Mohite,J) (R.S.Mohite,J) (R.S.Mohite,J)
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Companies Act, 2013 — ss. 391, 394.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 15 Sep 2006. The bench was R S MOHITE.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.