Disposed

Brentwood Reality Pvt. Ltd. v. -

Bombay HC17 Jun 2016CSD/431/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Bombay High Court dispensed with holding meetings of equity shareholders, secured creditors, and unsecured creditors of the applicant company for a scheme of amalgamation, as consent from all relevant parties had already been obtained.

What did the court decide?

The convening of meetings for equity shareholders, secured creditors, and unsecured creditors regarding the proposed Scheme of Amalgamation is dispensed with.

Brentwood Reality Pvt. Ltd. Vs - — Company and Corporate | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶4

COMPANY SUMMONS FOR DIRECTION NO 431 OF 2016

¶5

In the matter of Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956)

¶6

AND

¶7

In the matter of the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956) and

¶8

Companies Act, 2013;

¶9

AND

¶10

In the matter of Scheme of Amalgamation of HJ Support Services Private Limited and Dale Management Services Private Limited and H Horizon Support Services Private Limited with Brentwood Reality Private Limited and their

¶11

respective shareholders

¶12

Brentwood Reality Private Limited , a Company incorporated } Under the provisions of Companies Act, 1956 having its } Registered office at 5, 11/A Technopolis Knowledge Park, } Mahakali Caves Road, Andheri East, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India }

¶13

……Applicant

¶14

Called Summons for Direction for Hearing

¶15

Mr. Hemant Sethi with Mr. Ajit Singh Tawar i/b. Hemant Sethi & Co., Advocates for the

¶16

Applicant Company

¶17

CORAM: B.P. COLABAWALLA, J DATE: 17^TH JUNE 2016

¶18

MINUTES OF THE ORDER

¶19

¶20

UPON the Application of the Applicant Company above named by a Company 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 15^th day of March, 2016 of Mr. Hiteish Joshi, Director of the Applicant Company, in support of Company Summons for Direction, and the Exhibits there in referred to, IT IS ORDERED THAT:

¶21

The convening and holding the meeting of the 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 HJ Support Services Private Limited and Dale Management Services Private Limited and H Horizon Support Services Private Limited with Brentwood Reality Private Limited and their respective shareholders, is dispensed with, in view of the consent given by both the Equity Shareholders of the Applicant Company, which are annexed as Exhibits “H-1” and “H-2” to the Affidavit in support of the Company Summons for Direction.

¶22

There are no Secured Creditors of the Applicant Company as stated in paragraph 13 of the Affidavit in support of Company Summons for Direction. Hence, the question of convening and holding the meeting of Secured Creditors does not arise.

¶23

The convening and holding the meeting of the Unsecured Creditors 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 HJ Support Services Private Limited and Dale Management Services Private Limited and H Horizon Support Services Private Limited with Brentwood

¶24

¶25

Reality Private Limited and their respective shareholders, is dispensed with, in view of the consent given by Sole Unsecured Creditors of the Applicant Company, which is annexed as Exhibits “J” to the Affidavit in support of the Company Summons for Direction.

¶26

(B.P. Colabawalla, J)

¶27

CERTIFICATE

¶28

I certify that this Order uploaded is a true and correct copy of original signed order. Uploaded by: Shankar Gawde, Stenographer

Brentwood Reality Pvt. Ltd. v. -

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Brentwood Reality 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

The Official Liquidator High Court Bombay Vs M/S. Artek Organic Ind. Ltd.

Sira Impex Pvt. Ltd. Vs M/S. Mudra Lifestyle Ltd. Cin No. L17110MH1997PLC106945

Lakshmi Vilas Bank Ltd. Vs Reid and Taylor (India) Ltd. (Cin U17114MH2000PLC126018)

Yogi Machining and Forging Private Limited Vs 0

Shivkripa Enterprise Pvt.Ltd. Vs -

Gitanjali Exports Corporation Ltd. Vs -