Allowed

Sks Cemants Ltd. v. ---

Bombay HC1 Mar 2013CSD/203/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a company summons case under Sections 391-394 of the Companies Act, 1956, the Bombay High Court dispensed with the need to convene meetings for equity shareholders and secured creditors due to their unanimous consent. The Court also accepted the undertaking to obtain unsecured creditor consents via specific media notifications.

What did the court decide?

Meeting of equity shareholders and secured creditors dispensed with; undertaking for unsecured creditors accepted.

Sks Cemants Ltd. Vs --- — Company and Corporate | Bombay HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION COMPANY SUMMONS FOR DIRECTION NO. 203 OF 2013

¶2

In the matter of the Companies Act, 1956

¶3

AND

¶4

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

¶5

AND

¶6

In the matter of SKS Cements Limited

¶7

AND

¶8

In the matter of;

¶9

Scheme of Arrangement

¶10

BETWEEN

¶11

SKS Ispat and Power Limited ..Demerged Company

¶12

AND

¶13

SKS Cements Limited … Resulting Company

¶14

AND

¶15

Their respective shareholders and creditors

¶16

SKS Cements Limited a company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 and having its registered office at 501-B Elegant Business Park, Andheri Kurla Road, Andheri (East), Mumbai-400 059

¶17

Applicant / Resulting Company

¶18

¶19

Called Summons for Direction

¶20

Mr. Naser Rizvi i/b. M/s. Thakore Jariwala & Associates, Advocates for Applicant

¶21

CORAM: N. M. Jamdar, J. Date : 1^st March, 2013

¶22

MINUTES OF THE ORDER

¶23

UPON the application of SKS Cements Limited, the Applicant abovenamed by Summons for Direction AND upon hearing Mr. Naser Rizvi, i/b M/s. Thakore Jariwala & Associates, Advocates for the Applicant Company AND UPON reading the Affidavit dated 07^th February, 2013 of Mr. Anil Gupta, Director of the Applicant Company in support of Summons for Direction and the Exhibits therein referred to, IT IS ORDERED:-

¶24

That convening and holding the meeting of the Equity Shareholders of the Applicant / Resulting Company, for the purpose of considering and, if thought fit, approving, with or without modification(s), the proposed Scheme of Arrangement between SKS Ispat And Power Limited and SKS Cements Limited, is dispensed with in view of the consents given by all the Seven Equity Shareholders of the Applicant Company, which are annexed as Exhibits “J-1 to J- 7” to the Affidavit-in-support of the Summons for Direction.

¶25

There are no Secured Creditors of the Applicant Company as stated in paragraph 31 of the Affidavit in support of Company Summons for

¶26

¶27

Direction. Hence, the question of convening and holding the meeting of Secured Creditors does not arise.

¶28

That convening and holding the Meeting of the Unsecured Creditors of the Applicant / Demerged Company, for the purpose of considering and, if thought fit, approving, with or without modification(s), the proposed Scheme of Arrangement between SKS Ispat And Power Limited and SKS Cements Limited, is dispensed with in view of the averment made in paragraph 32(c) of the said Affidavit that the Applicant company undertakes to file list of Unsecured Creditors as on date of filing of Petition and also undertakes to obtain and annex original consent letters of all the Unsecured Creditors as per list, failing which the Applicant Company further undertakes to issue individual notices by R.P.A.D. and/or Airmail of the date of hearing of Petition to those Unsecured Creditors whose consents are not obtained or to all Unsecured Creditor as per list and also undertakes to publish the same in two newspapers i.e. ‘Free Press Journal’ in English language and translation thereof in ‘Navshakti’ in Marathi language having circulation in Mumbai. The said Undertaking is accepted.

Sks Cemants Ltd. v. ---

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sks Cemants Ltd. 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

Radharaman Fibres Private Limited Vs

Jai Suprabha Protective Products Private Limited Vs

Suprabha Dhatu Raksha Products Private Limited Vs

N2N Technologies Ltd. Vs --

Sks Ispat and Power Ltd. Vs ---

Poonawalla Financials Pvt.Ltd. Vs --