Disposed

Ace Industrial Services Private Limited Vs

Bombay HC12 Oct 2012CSD/703/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court dispensed with convening meetings of equity shareholders and creditors for a scheme of amalgamation. Consents of shareholders were accepted, and notice to unsecured creditors via registered post and newspaper publication was directed.

What did the court decide?

Meeting of shareholders and secured creditors declined as per consents; meeting of unsecured creditors dispensed with subject to notice publication.

Ace Industrial Services Private Limited Vs — Specific Performance | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶2

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶3

COMPANY SUMMONS FOR DIRECTION NO. 703 OF 2012.

¶4

In the matter of the Companies Act, 1 of 1956;

¶5

AND

¶6

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

¶7

AND

¶8

In the matter of Scheme of Amalgamation of ACE INDUSTRIAL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, the First Transferor Company AND

¶9

ATLANTA ADVISORY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, the Second Transferor Company

¶10

WITH

¶11

AAA PIVOTAL ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED, the Transferee Company

¶12

ACE INDUSTRIAL SERVICES PRIVATE ) LIMITED, a company incorporated ) under the Companies Act, 1956 having ) its registered office at 502, Plot No. ) 91/94, Prabhat Colony, Santacruz ) (East), Mumbai- 400055. ) …Applicant Company.

¶13

Called for Summons for Direction

¶14

Mr. Rajesh Shah with Mr.Chandrakant Mahadeshwar i/b M/s. Rajesh Shah & Co., Advocate for the Applicant

¶15

Coram: Anoop V. Mohta, J Date : 12^th October, 2012

¶16

MINUTES OF THE ORDER

¶17

UPON the application of the Applicant Company abovenamed by a Summons for Direction AND UPON HEARING Mr. Rajesh Shah instructed by M/s. Rajesh Shah & Co., Advocate for the Applicant

¶18

Company, AND UPON READING the Affidavit dated 30^th August, 2012 of Mr. Pushkar Marathe, Director of the Applicant Company jointly with Mr. Pramod Satam, Authorised Signatories of the Applicant Company, in support of the Summons for Direction and the Exhibits therein referred to, IT IS ORDERED:-

¶19

That the convening and holding the meeting of the Equity Shareholders of the Applicant Company for the purpose of considering and if thought it appearing with or without modification(s) the proposed Scheme of Amalgamation of ACE INDUSTRIAL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED the Applicant / First Transferor Company and ATLANTA ADVISORY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, the Second Transferor Company with AAA PIVOTAL ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED, the Transferee Company is dispensed with in view of the consents given by both Equity Shareholders of the Applicant Company, which are annexed as Exhibits “C-1” and “C-2” to the Affidavit in support of Summons for Direction.

¶20

That there are no Secured Creditors of the Applicant Company as stated in paragraph 22 of the Affidavit in support of Summons for Direction. Hence, the question of convening and holding the meeting of Secured Creditors does not arise.

¶21

That the convening and holding of the meeting of the Unsecured Creditors of the Applicant Company for the purpose of considering and if thought it appearing with or without modification(s) the proposed Scheme of Amalgamation of ACE INDUSTRIAL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED the

¶22

Applicant / First Transferor Company and ATLANTA ADVISORY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, the Second Transferor Company with AAA PIVOTAL ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED, the Transferee Company is dispensed with in view of the averments made in paragraph 23 of the Affidavit in support of the Summons for Direction. The Applicant undertakes to give individual notice of date of hearing of Petition by Registered Post A. D. to its all Unsecured Creditors and also to publish the same in two local news papers viz. “Free Press Journal”, in English language and translation thereof in “Navshakti”, in Marathi language, both having circulation in Mumbai. The said undertaking is accepted.

¶23

(Anoop V. Mohta, J.)

Ace Industrial Services Private Limited Vs

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ace Industrial Services Private Limited Vs

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

Mahindra and Mahindra Limited Vs European Project and Aviation Ltd. - U64200MH1996PLC103693

Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Vs Tema India Ltd. and Anr.

Freny Kersi Irani and Anr. Vs Kali Pestonji Contractor and 15 Ors.

Nivedan Distributors Private Limited Vs

Jsk Industries Private Limited Vs

Atlanta Advisory Services Private Limited Vs