Disposed

Sipra Services and Investments Private Limited v. --------------------------------------

Bombay HC21 Jan 2011CSD/38/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Bombay High Court in a Companies Act summons for direction granted the applicant company's relief to dispense with meetings of shareholders, waived notice to unsecured creditors via undertaking, and held no meeting required for absent secured creditors.

What did the court decide?

Dispensed with need for shareholder meeting; accepted undertaking to notify unsecured creditors; no meeting required for secured creditors.

Sipra Services and Investments Private Limited Vs… — Specific Performance | Bombay HC (2011)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICITON

¶4

COMPANY SUMMONS FOR DIRECTION NO 38 OF 2011

¶5

In the matter of Sections 391 & 394 of the Companies Act, 1956;

¶6

And

¶7

In the matter of Scheme of Arrangement between Veena Diecasters & Engineers Private Limited and Sipra Services & Investments Private Limited and Their Respective Shareholders.

¶8

Sipra Services & Investments Private Limited, A Company incorporated under the provisions Of Companies Act, 1956 having its registered office at93-A, Mittal Tower, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021.

¶9

} } } } }…..Applicant Company

¶10

Called Summons for Direction

¶11

CORAM: S. C. DHARMADHIKARI, J. Date: 21^st January, 2011

¶12

Mr. Hemant Sethi i/b. Hemant Sethi & Co., Advocates for the Applicant.

¶13

MINUTES OF THE ORDER

¶14

UPON the application of the Applicant Company abovenamed by a Summons for Direction AND UPON HEARING Mr. Hemant Sethi instructed by Hemant Sethi & Co., Advocates for the Applicant Company, AND UPON READING the Affidavit dated 11^th January, 2011 of Mr. Sitaram B Shah, Director of the Applicant Company, in support of Company Summons for Direction and the Exhibits therein referred to, IT IS ORDERED:

¶15

That convening and holding the meeting of the Equity Shareholders of Sipra Services & Investments Private Limited, the Applicant Company, for the purpose of considering and, if thought fit, approving, with or

¶16

¶17

without modification(s), the proposed Scheme of Arrangement between Veena Diecasters & Engineers Private Limited, the Demerged Company and Sipra Services & Investments Private Limited, the Applicant/Resulting Company and their Respective Shareholders is dispensed with in view of the consents given by all the Equity Shareholders of the Applicant Company, which are annexed as Exhibits “G1” to “G9” to the Affidavit in support of Company Summons for Direction.

¶18

That convening and holding the meeting of the Unsecured Creditors of Sipra Services & Investments Private Limited, the Applicant Company, for the purpose of considering and, if thought fit, approving, with or without modification(s), the proposed Scheme of Arrangement between Veena Diecasters & Engineers Private Limited, the Demerged Company and Sipra Services & Investments Private Limited, the Applicant/Resulting Company and their Respective Shareholders is dispensed with in view of averments made in paragraph eighteen of the Affidavit in support of Company Summons for Direction. The Applicant undertakes to issue individual notice of hearing of petition by RPAD to all its Unsecured Creditors and also to publish the notice of hearing of petition in one issue each of a daily newspaper viz ‘Free Press Journal’ in English and ‘Maharashtra Times’ in the Marathi. The said undertaking is accepted.

¶19

That there are no Secured Creditors in Sipra Services & Investments Private Limited, the Applicant Company as stated in paragraph nineteen of the Affidavit in support of Company Summons for Direction and

¶20

¶21

hence, the question of convening and holding the meeting of Secured

¶22

Creditors does not arise.

¶23

(S. C. DHARMADHIKARI, J. )

Sipra Services and Investments Private Limited v. --------------------------------------

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sipra Services and Investments Private Limited v. --------------------------------------

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

N.R.B. Bearings Ltd. Vs the Premier Limited

Asia Satellite Telecommunications Co. Ltd. Vs Inx Media Pvt. Ltd.

Grand Foundry Ltd. Vs Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction

Dighi Port Limited Vs Dighi Koli Samaj Mumbai Rahivasi Sangh and Ors.

Veena Diecasters and Engineers Private Limited Vs ----------------------------------------

Pressmaatic Electro Stampings Private Limited Vs ---------------------------------------