Allowed

M/s Emmennar Bio-Tech Private Limited, v. -

Telangana HC20 Feb 2013COMPA/290/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an application filed by a transferee company dispensing with a shareholders meeting. The court held that since all shareholders had filed affidavits indicating consent to the proposed amalgamation scheme, a physical meeting was unnecessary.

What did the court decide?

The Company Application was allowed, dispensing with the meeting of the shareholders of the transferee company for the purpose of approving the subject scheme of amalgamation.

M/s Emmennar Bio-Tech Private Limited, Vs - — Company and Corporate | Telangana HC (2013)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR

¶2

COMPANY APPLICATION NO.290 OF 2013

¶3

DATED 2 0 TH FEBRUARY, 2013

¶4

M/s.Emmennar Bio-Tech Private Limited, a Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 having its Registered Office at Plot No.A-4, MCH No.7-2-A4, Industrial Estate, Opp: Sanath Nagar Police Station, Sanath Nagar, Hyderabad – 500 018, Andhra Pradesh, India, Represented by its Director, L.D.Maheswara Reddy

¶5

…Applicant/Transferee Company

¶6

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR

¶7

COMPANY APPLICATION NO.290 OF 2013

¶8

ORDER:

¶9

This application is filed by the transferee company to dispense with the meeting of its shareholders for the purpose of approving the scheme of amalgamation that it proposes to enter into with M/s.Emmennar Chem Private Limited, the transferor company.

¶10

The authorised share capital of the transferee company is Rs.5,00,00,000/- divided into 50,00,000 equity shares of Rs.10/- each while its present issued, subscribed and paid up share capital is Rs.4,98,32,110/- divided into 49,83,211 equity shares of Rs.10/- each.

¶11

This shareholding is held by 19 individual members:

¶12

Sl.No.	Name of the shareholder	No. of shares
1.	M.Narayana Reddy	10,88,301
2.	M.Sudha	4,52,500
3.	M.Lakshmi Prasanna	4,12,500
4.	M.Maha Vishnu	13,69,080
5.	M.V.Subba Reddy	32,100
6.	P.Muni Reddy	32,100
7.	M.V.Narayana Reddy	60,990
8.	M.Venkata Subba Reddy	21,000
9.	M.Prasanthi	35,310
10.	K.V.S.R.Seshu Kumar	1,10,425
11.	L.D.Maheswara Reddy	1,03,220
12.	L.Subba Reddy	17,500
13.	G.Lakshmi Reddy	32,620
14.	M.Maheswara Reddy	1,07,856
15.	M.Nageswari	20,544
16.	K.Vamsidhar Reddy	10,08,675
17.	M.Subba Reddy	22,470
18.	M.Syamalamma	16,860

¶13

19. L.Suneela 39,160

¶14

All the shareholders have filed individual affidavits dated 19.12.2012 setting out the extent of their shareholding and indicating their consent/no objection to the proposed scheme of amalgamation.

¶15

As the shareholders of the transferee company have already signified their consent to the proposed scheme of amalgamation, this Court sees no purpose in directing their meeting to be held for considering the subject scheme of amalgamation.

¶16

The Company Application is accordingly allowed dispensing with the meeting of the shareholders of the transferee company for the purpose of approving the subject scheme of amalgamation.

¶17

____________________ SANJAY KUMAR, J. 20^TH FEBRUARY, 2013. VGSR

M/s Emmennar Bio-Tech Private Limited, v. -

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s Emmennar Bio-Tech 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

K.B.Jagan Mohan Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh , rep.by its Secretary

B. Kishan S/o B. Naraiah Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep by Secretary

P.S.S. Ravi Kumar S/o P. Charles, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh repby Secretary, Agriculture

M/s Emmennar Chem Private Limited, Vs -

Ch.Nageswar Rao, Vs Shaik Anisur Rahman

M/s.Gingersoft Media Private Limited. Vs -