The shareholders of Green Ltd. and Yellow Ltd. are the same set of people. Green Ltd. and Yellow Ltd. have merged and formed Green Yellow Ltd. It is the contention of the shareholders that since both the transferor and transferee are the same set of people, there is no transfer and hence no liability to stamp duty. Discuss with reference to case law.
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Companies Act_Practical Problems_55
Is sanction of the court necessary for a scheme of amalgamation wherein the petitioner company had no secured creditors and all unsecured creditors had accorded their approval to the proposed scheme along with the shareholders of both the companies ? The official liquidator also did not have any objection to the scheme. Substantiate your answer.
Companies Act_Practical Problems_54
An agreement was entered into between a company and its workers. Later on, the said company was to amalgamate with another company. The workers of the said company would like to object to the scheme as creditors. Advise.
Wednesday, February 04, 2009
Companies Act_Practical Problems_53
Giveth Ltd. supplies material to Taketh Ltd. and the latter fails to pay. Hence, Giveth Ltd. files a petition for winding-up of Taketh Ltd. and serves a notice quoting purchase order and invoice which Taketh Ltd. denies. Can Giveth Ltd. enforce the winding-up ?
Companies Act_Practical Problems_52
The Company Law Board has inter alia the power to order the purchase of shares or interests of any members of the company by other members thereof or by the company under section 402. Since section 77A deals with the matter of buy-back of the company’s own shares, do you think that the implementation of the order of the Company Law Board requiring the company to buy shares of certain members of the company, will need compliance with the requirements of section 77A. Substantiate your answer.
Monday, February 02, 2009
Companies Act_Practical Problems_51
Info Com Ltd. receives a notice at its registered office from the Company Law Board through a local courier and the company refuses to accept the same objecting on the ground that the notice had not been sent in a proper manner. Discuss.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Payment of Gratuity_Practical Problems_2
Rajesh was occupying service quarters of the company. After his retirement, he did not vacate the quarters. In retaliation, the company withheld the gratuity payable to him. Is the action of the company justified ?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
