Dismissed

Gopesh Commercials Pvt. Ltd. v. -

Bombay HC19 Dec 2014CSD/915/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed an application for a summons for direction under Section 391 of the Companies Act, 1956 regarding a Scheme of Amalgamation. The court held that a meeting of equity shareholders is dispensed with due to their unanimous consent. No meeting of preference shareholders, secured creditors, or unsecured creditors was required as none existed.

What did the court decide?

The summoning and holding of meetings of equity share and creditors was dispensed with due to unanimous consent.

Gopesh Commercials Pvt. Ltd. Vs - — Company and Corporate | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION COMPANY SUMMONS FOR DIRECTION NO. 915 OF 2014

¶2

In the matter of the Companies Act, 1956 and the Companies Act, 2013, as applicable;

¶3

-And-

¶4

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

¶5

-And-

¶6

In the matter of the Scheme of Amalgamation of

¶7

(1) Bhagyashri Mercantile Private Limited

¶8

¶9

(2) Chitrani Mercantile Private Limited

¶10

¶11

(3) Gopesh Commercials Private Limited AND

¶12

(4) Nemita Commercials Private Limited AND

¶13

(5) Nisarga Commercials Private Limited AND

¶14

(6) Prakruti Commercials Private Limited AND

¶15

(7) Vijayant Commercials Private Limited WITH

¶16

(8) Reliance Haryana SEZ Limited

¶17

Page 1 of 3

¶18

Gopesh Commercials Private Limited,	)
a company incorporated under the Companies Act,	)
1956 and having its registered office at	)
3^rdFloor, Court House, Lokmanya Tilak Marg,	)
Dhobi Talao, Mumbai – 400 002, Maharashtra,	)…Applicant Company

¶19

CALLED SUMMONS FOR DIRECTION FOR HEARING:

¶20

Ms. Sonali Aggarwal i/b M/s. Junnarkar & Associates, Advocates for the Applicant Company.

¶21

Coram: S.J. Kathawalla, J. Date : 19^th December, 2014

¶22

MINUTES OF THE ORDER

¶23

Upon the Application of the Applicant Company abovenamed by a Summons for Direction and UPON HEARING Ms. Sonali Aggarwal i/b M/s. Junnarkar & Associates, Advocates for the Applicant Company, AND UPON READING the Affidavit dated 2^nd December, 2014 of Mr. Rohit Shah, Authorised Signatory of the Applicant Company in support of the Summons for Direction and the Exhibits therein referred to, IT IS ORDERED:-

¶24

[1] That the convening and holding of the meeting of Equity Shareholders of the Applicant Company, for the purpose of considering and, if thought fit, approving, with or without modification(s), the proposed Scheme of Amalgamation of Bhagyashri Mercantile Private Limited and Chitrani Mercantile Private Limited and Gopesh Commercials Private Limited and Nemita Commercials Private Limited and Nisarga Commercials Private Limited and Prakruti Commercials Private Limited and Vijayant Commercials

¶25

Page 2 of 3

¶26

Private Limited with Reliance Haryana SEZ Limited, is dispensed with in view of the consent given by all the seven Equity Shareholders which are annexed as Exhibit “I-1” to Exhibit “I-7” to the Affidavit in Support of the Summons for Direction.

¶27

[2] The question of convening and holding the meeting of Preference Shareholders does not arise as there are no Preference Shareholders of the Applicant Company, as stated in paragraph no. 16 of the Affidavit in Support of the Summons for Direction.

¶28

[3] The question of convening and holding the meeting of Secured Creditors does not arise as there are no Secured Creditors of the Applicant Company, as stated in paragraph no. 17 of the Affidavit in Support of the Summons for Direction.

¶29

[4] The question of convening and holding the meeting of Unsecured Creditors does not arise as there are no Unsecured Creditors of the Applicant Company, as stated in paragraph no. 18 of the Affidavit in Support of the Summons for Direction.

¶30

(S.J. Kathawalla, J.)

¶31

Page 3 of 3

Gopesh Commercials Pvt. Ltd. v. -

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gopesh Commercials Pvt. 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

M/S.Prime Lifestyle Vs M/S.Elder Instruments Pvt.Ltd, Cin NO.U29120MH1993PTC074117

M/S.Bajaj Healthcare Ltd. Vs M/S.Camlin Fine Sciences Ltd., Cin NO.L74100MH1993PLC075361

Bright Business Services Private Limited Vs Elder Instruments Private Limited Cin No. U29120MH1993PTC074117.

M/S. Ishi Marketing and Advertising Pvt. Ltd. and 4 Ors. Vs M/S. Oracle Home Textile Ltd. (Cin U70102MH1985PLC036047)

Balkrishna Ganesh Thite Vs Official Liquidator of M/S. Swastik Rubber Products Ltd. (in Liqn.)

Irishman Steels Private Limited Vs -