Contents at a glance About the author. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii Table of contents. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi Table of cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . lxxi
VOLUME 1 Chapter 1
Concepts of “company�. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-1
Chapter 2
Lifting of corporate veil. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-1
Chapter 3
Powers of company. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-1
Chapter 4
Private company. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-1
Chapter 5
Public company. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-1
Chapter 6
Listed company. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-1
Chapter 7
One person company. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-1
Chapter 8
Holding subsidiary relationship. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-1
Chapter 9
Members . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-1
Chapter 10
Memorandum of Association. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-1
Chapter 11
Articles of Association. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-1
Chapter 12
Name of the company . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-1
Chapter 13
Change of name of company. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13-1
Chapter 14
Shares. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-1
Chapter 15
Reduction in share capital. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15-1
Chapter 16
Buy back of shares. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16-1
Chapter 17
Further issue of share capital. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17-1
Chapter 18
Right shares. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18-1
Chapter 19
Bonus shares . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19-1
Chapter 20
Transmission of shares. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20-1
Chapter 21
Transfer of shares. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-1
Chapter 22
Shareholders. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22-1
Chapter 23
Debentures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23-1 ix
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Chapter 24
Deposit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24-1
Chapter 25
Investments, loans, guarantees and securities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25-1
Chapter 26
Dividend. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-1
Chapter 27
Partnership. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27-1
Chapter 28
Register & Returns. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28-1
Chapter 29
Contract. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29-1
Chapter 30
Remuneration. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-1
Chapter 31
Related party transactions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-1
Chapter 32
Reserves. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32-1
Chapter 33
Audit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-1
Chapter 34
Class action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34-1
Chapter 35
Offences and liabilities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-1
VOLUME 2 Chapter 36
Redemption of preference shares. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36-1
Chapter 37
Securities premium account. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37-1
Chapter 38
Office or place of profit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38-1
Chapter 39
Amalgamation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-1
Chapter 40
Business restructuring. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40-1
Chapter 41
Compromise or Arrangement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41-1
Chapter 42
Merger. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42-1
Chapter 43
Directors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-1
Chapter 44
Loans to Directors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-1
Chapter 45
Retirement by rotation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45-1
Chapter 46
Managing director . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-1
Chapter 47
Manager. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47-1
Chapter 48
Company Secretary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-1
Chapter 49
Board meeting. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-1
Chapter 50
Meetings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-1
Chapter 51
Voting rights. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-1
Chapter 52
Proxies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52-1 x
Contents at a glance
Chapter 53
Notice. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53-1
Chapter 54
Quorum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54-1
Chapter 55
Oppression and mismanagement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-1
Chapter 56
Principle of natural justice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56-1
Chapter 57
Charge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57-1
Chapter 58
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1999. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58-1
Chapter 59
Doctrine of ‘indoor management’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59-1
Chapter 60
Doctrine of ratification. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60-1
Chapter 61
Prospective or retrospective operation of a statute . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-1
Chapter 62
Time limit expressions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62-1
Chapter 63
Interpretation of law. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63-1
Chapter 64
Conclusive evidence of a transaction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-1
Chapter 65
Period of time. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-1
Chapter 66
Serving of document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66-1
Chapter 67
Legal status of documents. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67-1
Chapter 68
Jurisdiction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68-1
Chapter 69
Non-compete and confidentiality clause . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69-1
xi
Table of contents About the author. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii Contents at a glance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix Table of cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . lxxi
VOLUME 1 Chapter 1
Concepts of “company”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-1
1.1
What do the concepts of ‘company’, ‘body corporate’, ‘corporation’ and ‘person’ contemplate in relation to companies registered under the Companies Act?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-3 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-3 Attributes of corporate personality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-9 Difference between incorporation of a company and constitution or establishment of a corporation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-10 Whether company is a ‘person’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-12 Whether a company is a citizen. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-14
1.2
Distinct personality of a company - U. P. State Ind. Dev. Corp. Ltd v Monsanto Manufacturers Ltd [2015] 189 Comp Cas 69 (SC) : does it need reconsideration? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-16 Introduction: Two judgments in stark contrast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-16 Corporate personality of a company. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-17 The principle of independent corporate entity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-18 Piercing the veil. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-22 What did Monsanto case decide? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-26
1.3
Lawsuit by a company: does it need a specific authorisation? . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-30 Avoidable negligence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-30 Sub-delegation of power by the delegate: Supreme Court’s recent ruling . . . 1-32 More decisions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-33 Power of attorney. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-36 Can unauthorised filing of suit be regularised by ratification. . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-38
xiii
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Chapter 2
Lifting of corporate veil. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-1
2.1
In which circumstances can the corporate veil of a company be lifted by courts and legislature? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-3 The Saloman principle and inroads. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-3 Specific cases in which corporate veil was lifted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-7
2.2
Is lifting of corporate veil allowed to ascertain evasion of excise duty by a company?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-19 Meaning of ‘incorporation’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-19 Doctrine of lifting the ‘corporate veil’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-20 Invoking the doctrine in excise duty matters. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-22
2.3
Holding-subsidiary relationship and the doctrine of piercing the corporate veil. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-24 The principle of independent corporate entity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-24 Holding and subsidiary companies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-25 Piercing the veil. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-31 A mere cloak or sham . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-33 A prominent Supreme Court decision. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-35 Whether UCC is liable as an agent of UCIL?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-38 Liability based on the alter ego doctrine leading to piercing corporate veil. . 2-40 General principle as to corporate veil piercing in holding-subsidiary relationship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-42 Corporate veil can be lifted when holding company exercises complete domination over the subsidiary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-44 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-46
Chapter 3
Powers of company . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-1
3.1
Can a company become a partner in a firm?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-3
3.2
Can a company complain against defamation?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-6 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-6 What is ‘defamation’?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-7 What is ‘libel’? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-7 What is ‘slander’?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-7 Can a company complain of defamation?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-8 Criminal action against offence of defamation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-12 Whether director of a company competent to initiate action. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-12 Whether a company was entitled to bring an action for slander without proof of special damage. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-14 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-14 xiv
Table of contents
3.3
Can a company distribute, sell or gift its assets to shareholders?. . . . . . . . . . 3-15 Case in point . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-15 Company’s property is not shareholders’ property. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-16 The principle of maintenance of capital . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-17 Sale of asset by a company to its shareholder. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-20 Directors’ liability for payment of dividend out of capital . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-21 Dividend to be paid only out of profits. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-23 Can a company distribute its asset by way of dividend?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-23 Whether distribution of assets amounts to payment of dividend. . . . . . . . . . . 3-24 Whether sale proceeds of assets can be distributed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-26 Company in winding up . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-26 Gifting company’s asset to shareholder through a scheme of arrangement . . 3-27 Liability of directors for dividend paid out of capital. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-28 Auditors’ liability for declaration of dividend out of capital. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-32
Chapter 4
Private company. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-1
4.1
Definition of ‘private company’ – how to count the number of members?. . . . 4-3 Limit on the number of members . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-3 Employee and ex-employee shareholder. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-4 Joint shareholders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-4 Whether a case falling within both the provisos is eligible for exclusion. . . . . 4-5
4.2
What are the exemptions and privileges available to private companies? . . . . 4-7 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-7 Exemptions granted by notification issued by central government. . . . . . . . . . 4-8 Applicability of various provisions of Companies Act 2013 to private companies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-16
4.3
Are provisions of Securities Contacts (Regulation) Act, 1956 applicable to private companies?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-39 Definitions of private company and public company. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-39 Restrictions on transfer. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-40 Applicability of Securities Contacts (Regulation) Act, 1956 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-41 The controversy as to the applicability of the SCRA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-42 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-47
4.4
Can a shareholder of a private company be an outsider when the company’s articles of association do not contain pre-emption provisions? . . 4-48 The case. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-48 Discussion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-49 Articles of a company constitute a contract among members. . . . . . . 4-49 xv
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Transferability- a salient feature of shares. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-50 Restriction on the shares of a private company. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-51 Rules of interpretation of Articles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-54 Articles of ABC Pvt Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-55 Transfer of shares . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-55 Participation by directors in the resolution for approval of transfer of shares . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-56 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-56 4.5
Companies Act 2013: What is the legal status of Indian private company as a subsidiary of a foreign company?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-58 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-58 Definitions of key terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-59 Special provision affecting private company which is a subsidiary of a foreign company. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-60 Status of an Indian private company as subsidiary of foreign company under the 2013 Act. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-61 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-62
Chapter 5 5.1
Definition of ‘public company’: what is the effect of the proviso?. . . . . . . . . . 5-3 Statutory definitions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-3 Interpretation of the proviso . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-4 Whether the company should increase the number of members. . . . . . . . . . . . 5-5 What amounts to “basic structure”? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-7 Section 43A of the 1956 Act did not lack clarity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-7 Case law on definitions in 1956 Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-8 Quorum at general meetings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-10 Effect of reduction in the number of members. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-10 Whether the company should increase the number of directors. . . . . . . . . . . 5-11
Chapter 6 6.1
Public company . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-1
Listed company . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-1
Companies Act, 2013: is a private company or a public company having its debt instruments listed on stock exchange a ‘listed company’?. . . . 6-3 Definition of ‘listed company’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-3 SCRA provisions as to listing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-6 Definition of ‘securities’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-7 Rules of interpretation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-10 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-13
xvi
Table of contents
Chapter 7 7.1
One person company. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-1
One person company: is the principle of corporate personality applicable?. . . 7-3 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-3 Statutory framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-3 The attribute of corporate personality. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-5 Company’s property is its own; not the shareholders’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-7 Ground-breaking decision of UK Supreme Court. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-9 Whether OPC’s property is sole shareholder’s property. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-10 Lifting of corporate veil. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-12 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-13
Chapter 8
Holding subsidiary relationship. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-1
8.1
Is a holding company liable for subsidiary’s responsibility under corporate agency and corporate veil piercing doctrine?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-3 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-3 Whether UCC is liable as an agent of UCIL?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-4 Liability based on the alter ego doctrine leading to piercing corporate veil. . . 8-6 General principle as to corporate veil piercing in holding-subsidiary relationship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-8 Corporate veil can be lifted when holding company exercises complete domination over the subsidiary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-11 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-14
8.2
The Companies Act, 2013: How the new definition of ‘subsidiary company’ is different than the previous one? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-16 Definition in the 1956 Act. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-16 Definition in the Companies Act, 2013. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-18 Anomalies and absurdities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-19 Indian companies as subsidiaries of foreign company . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-21 Omission of subsection (7) of section 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-21 Layers of subsidiaries- why is it sinful? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-22
8.3
What is the law relating to shareholding of holding company’s nominee in subsidiary? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-23 Nominee shareholding. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-23 Meaning of “any nominee or nominees of the company”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-24 Meaning of “if it is necessary so to do”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-24 Wholly-owned subsidiary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-25
xvii
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Chapter 9
Members. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-1
9.1
Can a minor be member of a company? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-3 Membership of a company . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-3 Natural guardian . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-6 Recent Supreme Court judgment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-7
9.2
What essential formalities must be followed to forfeit shares of a company? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-10 Notices. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-10 Call notice. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-11 Notice threatening forfeiture. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-11 Mode and proof of service of notice threatening forfeiture. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-12 Forfeiture invalid unless calls are unheeded. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-14
9.3
Can preference shareholders throw equity shareholders out of control of a company after acquiring voting rights?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-16 A tricky issue. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-16 Law relating to voting rights of preference shareholders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-18 Does equity shareholder always have preponderance of votes?. . . . . . . . . . . 9-19 Nature of voting right . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-19 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-21
9.4
Can a partnership firm become a member of a company? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-23 Provisions of Companies Act and Partnership Act. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-23 Definition in General Clauses Act. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-27
9.5
Membership in a private company: how to count the number limiting the number of members?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-30 Limit on the number of members . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-31 Employee and ex-employee shareholder. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-31 Joint shareholders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-32 Whether a case falling within both the provisos is eligible for exclusion. . . . 9-36
9.6
Benami shareholding: how do provisions of Companies Act, 2013 impact it?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-38 Entering trust on register of members. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-38 Section 187C of the Companies Act, 1956. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-39 Companies Act, 2013. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-40 Provision of Companies Act, 2013 regarding declaration of beneficial interest. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-41 Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-41
xviii
Table of contents
9.7
‘member’, ‘shareholder’ and ‘holder of a share’: do these expressions mean different persons than those whose names appear on the register of members?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-43 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-43 Orthodox view. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-44 Definition of ‘member’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-44 Is ‘shareholder’ and ‘the holder of a share’ different from ‘member’. . . . . . . 9-46 Is a person holding shares of a company through depository?. . . . . . . . . . . . 9-47 Is a legal representative of a deceased member a member? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-47 Definition in UK Companies Act. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-48 Definition of ‘subsidiary’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-49 Who is member in the case pledged shares. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-51 Right to object or dissent. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-51 Exceptions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-53 Does omission of sec.153 have a different effect? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-53 Effect of sec. 89. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-55 Whether an unregistered transferee can file a complaint under sec. 439?. . . . 9-55
9.8
Can shareholders interfere in the powers vested to the board of directors by the Act or articles of association? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-57 A case in point. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-57 The law as to chairman. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-58 The principle. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-58 The leading case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-58 One cannot step into the shoes of the other. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-59 The case law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-60
9.9
What are the critical analysis of section 90 of the Companies Act, 2013 as amended by the Companies (Amendment) Act, 2017. . . . . . . . . . . . 9-65 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-65 Definition of “beneficial interest” in shares. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-65 Declaration of beneficial interest in shares. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-67 Does section apply when legal owner and beneficial owner of shares is one and the same person? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-68 Procedure for making the declaration. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-70 Register of beneficial interests in shares. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-70 Return of significant beneficial owners of shares. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-71 Notice to ascertain significant beneficial ownership of shares . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-72
xix
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Chapter 10
Memorandum of Association . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-1
10.1 Whether memorandum of association of a company must contain power to amalgamate with any other company. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-3 Section 391/394, a ‘complete code’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-3 Whether memorandum should contain ‘power to amalgamate’. . . . . . . . . . . 10-5 Memorandum need not contain power to amalgamate. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-5 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-7 10.2 What is the effect of changes regarding objects clause of memorandum under Companies Act, 2013?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-8 Statutory provisions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-8 Purpose and interpretation of the change and its effect. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-9 How many objects can memorandum have?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-11 Interpretation of “any matter considered necessary in furtherance thereof”.10-11 Whether an all-pervasive clause is valid. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-13 Construction of the objects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-14 Alteration of Objects. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-15 10.3 Companies Act, 2013: ‘objects’ clause of memorandum and the ultra vires doctrine. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-17 Statutory provisions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-17 Purpose and interpretation of the new prescription. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-18 The ultra vires doctrine. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-18 Whether a power contained in “matters necessary in furtherance of objects” can be considered as object. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-20 Whether a provision contained in articles of association can save from the effect of ultra vires doctrine? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-21 Chapter 11
Articles of Association. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-1
11.1 Why is “articles of association” of a company a very important document?. 11-3 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-3 Articles as contract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-4 Enforceability of articles. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-6 Effect of section 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-6 Relation between memorandum and articles. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-9 Articles are subordinate to memorandum. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-9 11.2 Alteration to articles of association: is it necessary to provide members with details of the proposed alteration in the notice of meeting?. 11-11 A case in point. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-11 Statutory mandate and general principles. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-11 xx
Table of contents
Prominent cases. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-14 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-16 11.3 What are the principles relating to construction of articles of association?. 11-17 Meaning of ‘articles of association’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-17 General principles as to construction of articles. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-18 Presumption and implied term. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-19 Repugnance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-23 11.4 Companies Act 2013: entrenchment provisions – how do they affect covenants as to quorum in the shareholders’ agreement?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Statutory provisions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Quorum provisions in shareholders’ agreement and articles. . . . . . . . . . . . . Effect of the entrenchment provisions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
11-25 11-25 11-26 11-31
11.5 Shareholders’ agreements: what is the purport and effect of provisions of section 5 of Companies Act, 2013 regarding entrenchments of rights?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Rangaraj verdict. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Provisions of Companies Act 2013 as to entrenchment of rights. . . . . . . . . Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
11-32 11-34 11-39 11-41
Chapter 12
Name of the company . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-1
12.1 How does the Companies Act afford protection for corporate names?. . . . . . 12-3 Remedies for name protection under Companies Act. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-3 Analysis of section 22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-4 Protection of corporate name. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-7 12.2 Can a name or surname of an individual be used in a company’s name?. . . 12-11 Protection of corporate names. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-11 Court’s power to restrain use of similar names. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-12 Use of own name. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-12 Tort of passing-off. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-13 The judicial trend. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-14 Bombay High Court. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-18 Registrar’s duty. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-19 Action under Trademarks law. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-20 Position under the US law. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-21 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-23
xxi
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Chapter 13
Change of name of company. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13-1
13.1 How can a company get its name rectified when another company with similar name has been registered?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13-3 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13-6 13.2 What is the legal effect of change of name of a company?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13-7 How does a name change?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13-7 Change of name consequent to conversion of a company. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13-9 Trademark registration. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13-11 Change of name doesn’t change company’s constitution. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13-11 Chapter 14
Shares . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-1
14.1 What are the important factors that should be kept in mind while issuing duplicate share certificate? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-3 14.2 Can a public company issue shares with differential rights?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-7 Enabling and prohibitory provision. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-8 Basic drafting flaw. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-8 The rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-9 Can a listed company issue equity shares with differential rights?. . . . . . . . 14-10 Private companies’ freedom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-11 14.3 Can a company allot its shares for non-cash consideration?. . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-14 Meaning of ‘non-cash consideration’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-14 Requirement under section 75. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-15 Consideration by conversion of a debt or loan into shares. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-16 Adequacy of consideration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-19 Stamp duty. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-19 Company’s duty as to shares to be allotted for non-cash consideration. . . . 14-22 Dispute about non-issuance of shares under an agreement is an arbitrable dispute. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-22 Capital or revenue expenditure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-23 Disclosure in balance sheet. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-24 14.4 Can a shareholder of a company make a gift of his shares?. . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-25 Definition of gift . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-25 Registered instrument . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-26 Gift when complete. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-26 Companies Act. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-28 Supreme Court’s decision. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-28 Registration after donor’s death. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-29 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-30 xxii
Table of contents
14.5 What is nomination by a shareholder? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-31 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-31 Nomination in life insurance policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-31 Nomination by a bank customer. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-36 Nomination by a Shareholder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-36 14.6 Do provisions of the Companies Act regarding nomination by a shareholder override that of law of succession?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-39 The statute law. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-39 Literal construction versus purposive construction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-41 Contemporary provisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-43 Meaning of ‘vest’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-45 Can NSDL bye-laws override succession law?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-46 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-47 14.7 Are preemption rights clauses in shareholders’ agreements void and unenforceable?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-48 Recent Bombay High Court judgment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-54 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-57 14.8 Can a public company issue shares to existing members disproportionately? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-59 Is it mandatory to offer shares pro rata? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-61 14.9 Can a company have only preference share capital?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-64 14.10 Can a company cancel allotment of shares?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-68 Contract to take shares. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-68 Meaning of ‘reduction of capital’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-71 Cancellation of shares allotted is illegal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-71 14.11 Can a company use share premium for its business? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-75 What is share premium? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-75 The accounting entries. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-76 Does the use of money for company’s business amount to reduction of share premium?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-77 Wrapping up . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-80 14.12 Can a company give loan to its employee for acquiring its shares?. . . . . . . 14-82 The general restriction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-82 Exceptions to the restriction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-82 Issues raised. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-83 Issues examined – meaning of ‘salary’ and ‘wages’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-83 Dictionary meanings of the terms ‘salary’ and ‘wages’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-84 xxiii
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Supreme Court’s view. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-85 How these terms should be interpreted for the purpose of section 77. . . . . . 14-85 The second issue. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-86 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-87 14.13 What are the scope and limitations of the powers of the board regarding issue of shares?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-88 Prefatory note . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-88 Principles evolved by courts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-89 14.14 Forged transfer of shares: are the company and its directors/ officers liable?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-99 14.15 Is stamp duty payable on shares allotted and credited to allottees’ accounts in demat mode?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-103 Provisions of the Depositories Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-104 Stamp duty on share certificate. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-106 Section 8A of the Indian Stamp Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-108 Stamp duty on share certificate on ‘opting out’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-110 14.16 What are the salient features concerning joint shareholding?. . . . . . . . . . . Meaning of ‘joint shareholding’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Joint shareholders can be counted for quorum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Instrument of transfer must be “duly executed”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Execution in case of joint shareholding. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Transmission of shares held jointly. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
14-111 14-111 14-114 14-115 14-117 14-118
14.17 What is the difference between ‘creation’, ‘offer’, ‘issue’ and ‘allotment’ of shares?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-120 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-120 Contract to take shares. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-121 Meaning of ‘creation of shares’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-122 Section 94 – wrong use of the term ‘issue’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-123 Meaning of ‘offering shares’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-125 Meaning of ’allotment of shares’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-125 Recent English judicial view on the meaning of ‘issue of shares’ on the basis of contextual interpretation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-127 Meaning of ‘member’, ‘shareholder’, ‘holder’ of a share, ‘holding’ of a share . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-129
xxiv
Table of contents
14.18 Whether sale of shares amounts to sale of undertaking within the meaning of section 293(1)(A). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-131 14.19 How the rights attached to the shares of a company are varied?. . . . . . . . . 14-135 Meaning of “classes of shares”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-135 Meaning of “class rights” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-135 Meaning of “variation of class rights”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-138 Cases on ‘what amounts to variation’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-140 Authority for variation of class rights. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-146 Express or implied power to alter rights. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-146 Two alternative methods for approval of variation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-147 Rights of dissentient shareholders. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-150 14.20 What is the scope and limitation of the board of directors of a company regarding issue of shares? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-151 Prefatory note . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-151 Principles evolved by courts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-152 14.21 Can a private company issue shares with differential rights?. . . . . . . . . . . 14-162 14.22 Supreme Court decision in Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Ltd v. SEBI: What is the lesson?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-167 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-167 Difference between ‘issue/offer’ and ‘allotment’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-168 The anatomy of section 67: The ‘public offer’ versus ‘private offer’ imbroglio. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-170 Judicial view on meaning of “offering shares or debentures to the public”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-172 Private placement of shares or debentures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-175 Does “private & confidential” string help?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-180 Is compliance with section 60B necessary when there is no public offer?.14-181 Back to Sahara: the lesson. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-181 Will Sahara judgment help set at rest all controversies on section 67?. . . . 14-182 The jurisdiction conflict. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-182 Does the right of renunciation in a rights offer constitute the rights offer a public offer?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-183 Does allotment of unsubscribed shares in rights offer constitute ‘private placement offer’?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-184 14.23 A critical analysis of section 90 of the Companies Act, 2013. . . . . . . . . . . 14-186 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-186 Definition of “beneficial interest” in shares. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-186 Contradiction between section and rules. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-188 xxv
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Declaration of beneficial interest in shares. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-189 Does section apply when legal owner and beneficial owner of shares is one and the same person? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-190 Procedure for making the declaration. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-194 Register of beneficial interests in shares. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-194 Return of significant beneficial owners of shares. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-195 Notice to ascertain significant beneficial ownership of shares . . . . . . . . . . 14-195 Chapter 15
Reduction in share capital. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15-1
15.1 Can a company reduce its share capital on selective basis? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15-3 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15-3 Selective reduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15-3 15.2 Why is reduction of share capital, share premium & redemption reserve a useful statutory device for financial restructuring? . . . . . . . . . . . . 15-10 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15-10 Ambit of section 100. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15-11 Court’s discretion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15-16 Whether share capital of only some and not all of the shareholders can be reduced. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15-17 Whether redemption of redeemable preference shares amounts to reduction of capital . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15-23 Reduction of share premium account . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15-25 Chapter 16
Buy back of shares. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16-1
16.1 What does the phrase “out of free reserves or securities premium account” mean in respect of buyback of shares?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16-3 Analogous provision: power to issue redeemable preference shares . . . . . . . 16-4 Meaning of “out of”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16-4 Application of share premium account and use of money received as premium. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16-6 Chapter 17
Further issue of share capital. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17-1
17.1 What are the critical aspects of section 62 of the Companies Act, 2013?. . . . 17-3 Statutory framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17-3 Key points of the section. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17-4 Meaning of ‘rights issue’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17-5 Object and scope. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17-6 Section 62 vis-à-vis section 61 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17-8 Which types of securities fall within section 62. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17-9 Conditions to be fulfilled for making a rights issue. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17-9 xxvi
Table of contents
Interpretation of ‘holders of the equity shares’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17-10 Interpretation of “in proportion, as nearly as circumstances admit”. . . . . . . 17-11 Right of renunciation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17-12 Notice of offer. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17-13 Preferential offer. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17-14 Is section 42 applicable?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17-15 Scheme of section 62(1)(c). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17-17 Chapter 18
Right shares . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18-1
18.1 Does the rights offer of shares with the right of renunciation amount to public offer under Companies Act, 2013?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18-3 The case in point. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18-3 The controversy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18-4 Rules of interpretation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18-4 Relevant statutory provisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18-5 Section 42 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18-6 Section 62 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18-6 Meaning of ‘public offer’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18-6 Meaning of ‘rights issue’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18-7 Does the right of renunciation in a rights offer constitute the rights offer a public offer?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18-8 Karnataka High Court case. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18-10 Does allotment of unsubscribed shares in rights offer constitute ‘private placement offer’?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18-13 Difference between ‘offer’ and ‘allotment’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18-13 SEBI’s latest circular. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18-15 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18-16 Chapter 19
Bonus shares. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19-1
19.1 What are the salient aspects of section 63 of the Companies Act, 2013 regarding issue of bonus shares? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19-3 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19-3 Statutory framework under Companies Act 2013. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19-5 Meaning of ‘bonus shares’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19-5 Meaning of ‘reserve’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19-10 Meaning of “free reserve”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19-11 Nature of revaluation reserve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19-14 Can revaluation reserve be capitalised?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19-15 Can unlisted companies use revaluation reserve for bonus shares. . . . . . . . 19-16 Issue of bonus shares with differential rights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19-20 xxvii
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Chapter 20
Transmission of shares. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20-1
20.1 What are critical aspects of transmission of shares?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20-3 Meaning of ‘transmission’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20-3 Statutory provisions as to transmission. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20-5 Succession Certificate. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20-6 Company cannot refuse to register . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20-8 Transmission of Shares in the case of joint shareholdings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20-8 Joint holders as single member. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20-9 Surviving shareholder’s rights. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20-10 20.2 How does transmission of shares take place in the case of joint shareholdings?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20-14 Chapter 21
Transfer of shares. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-1
21.1 What are the stamp duty requirements for transfer of shares? . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-3 Mandatory requirement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-3 Mode of payment of duty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-4 Duty by whom payable. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-6 Value of shares. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-9 When Government is tranferor or transferee. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-12 Cancellation of stamps. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-12 Second cancellation by company . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-14 Transfer of trust shares . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-16 Stamp duty on pledged shares. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-16 Stamp duty when instrument is lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-17 Refusal of transfer for not being ‘duly stamped’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-17 21.2 Can a company accept, bequest or gift of its own shares? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-19 Surrender of shares . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-19 Purchase by company of its own shares . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-21 Gift to company of its own shares. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-22 21.3 Can company compel transfer of shares when a person ceases to be a director or employee? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-25 21.4 How is change in joint shareholding effected in the books of the company?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-28 21.5 Can the right to transferability of shares be curtailed by shareholders’ agreement?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-33 21.6 What are the special features of the law relating to transfer of shares of a private company?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-38 Membership of a company . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-38 xxviii
Table of contents
Share certificate. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-40 Register of members. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-41 Transfer: mandatory requirements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-43 Proper instrument . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-45 Restrictions on transfer of shares in a private limited company. . . . . . . . . . 21-47 Restriction on the right to transfer shares. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-48 Pre-emption provisions in articles. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-49 Non-compliance with pre-emption provisions– whether the doctrine of indoor management applies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-51 Two prominent cases concerning transfer of shares . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-55 21.7 Section 236 of Companies Act, 2013 : does it contemplate forced buyout of minority shareholder’s shares?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-57 Principal canons of interpretation of statutes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-57 The statutory framework. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-58 Meaning of two expressions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-59 Conditions for invoking section 236. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-59 Does the section force a shareholder to transfer his shares to the acquirer?.21-60 Whether statutory requirements as to transfer of shares would apply under section 236. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-60 Does section 236 create a legal obligation for minority shareholder? . . . . . 21-62 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-63 21.8 What are the principles governing relation between transferor and transferee of shares while the transfer is pending registration by the company?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-64 When does transferee become member?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-65 Transferor’s liability to transferee. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-67 Transferee’s rights and transferor’s liability. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-69 Chapter 22
Shareholders. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22-1
22.1 Is a shareholder owner of the company’s property? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22-3 Chapter 23
Debentures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23-1
23.1 Money raised by a company by issuing debenture or bond: whether it amounts to investment, loan or deposit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23-3 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23-3 Whether debenture is a security?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23-3 Whether debenture is a loan?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23-7 Whether debenture is a deposit?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23-9
xxix
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Chapter 24
Deposit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24-1
24.1 Provisions of the Companies Act, 2013 concerning deposits: is every money received or borrowed a deposit? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24-3 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24-3 Definition of ‘deposit’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24-4 Intent of the provisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24-6 Chapter 25
Investments, loans, guarantees and securities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25-1
25.1 Which companies are eligible for exemption under section 186(11) of the Companies Act, 2013?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25-3 Exempted investments, loans, guarantees and securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25-3 Exemption to company engaged in the business of financing of companies. 25-6 Exemption to companies engaged in the business of providing infrastructural facilities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25-6 Exemption to NBFCs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25-7 Exemption to company whose principal business is the acquisition of securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25-7 A case must strictly comply with subsection (11). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25-8 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25-8 25.2 Can power to make investments be delegated by the board of directors?. . . . 25-9 Delegation of power to invest under section 292 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25-10 Section 372, a specific provision, overrides section 292, a general provision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25-10 Legislative intent – stricter control over inter-corporate investment. . . . . . . 25-12 View of the Department of Company Affairs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25-13 Chapter 26
Dividend . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-1
26.1 What are the critical aspects relating to interim dividend?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-3 Meaning and concept. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-3 Authority to decide payment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-3 Whether confirmation of interim dividend at general meeting necessary. . . . 26-5 Directors’ duty as to interim dividend. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-7 Whether interim dividend is ‘debt’.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-10 26.2 Can a company adjust dividend against money due from shareholder?. . . . 26-13 Background of clauses (d) and (e). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-14 Company’s duty to pay dividend. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-15 Function of a proviso. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-16 Offence under section 207. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-16 Provision in articles regarding clause (d) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-18 xxx
Table of contents
Set-off provision in articles. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-19 Meaning of ‘lawful’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-19 Whether adjustment of dividend is lawful adjustment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-21 How should the power be exercised? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-22 26.3 Are preference shareholders entitled to arrears of dividend when a company goes into winding up? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-24 Preface. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-24 How to determine preference shareholders’ right to arrears of dividends. . . 26-25 Dividend out of assets when company in liquidation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-26 Arrears of dividend on cumulative preference shares. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-28 Dividend on cumulative preference share when not declared. . . . . . . . . . . . 26-33 Dividend on non-cumulative preference share. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-34 26.4 Can a company declare a dividend at a meeting other than annual general meeting?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-36 Relevant provisions of the Companies Act. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-36 Case law. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-37 Department of Company Affairs’ views . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-40 What is cumulative preference share?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-41 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-43 26.5 What are the key amendments made by the Companies (Amendment) Act, 2015 relating to dividend? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-44 Concept of interim dividend . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-45 Statutory provisions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-47 26.6 Whether declaration of dividend on preference shares is necessary?. . . . . . 26-50 26.7 Can a company declare a dividend out of past years’ profits?. . . . . . . . . . . . 26-57 No dividend shall be paid except out of profits. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-57 Meaning of ‘profits’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-58 The anomaly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-59 26.8 Whether it is necessary to declare dividend on preference shares?. . . . . . . . 26-62 Chapter 27
Partnership. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27-1
27.1 Whether a partnership can be amalgamated with a limited company under section 391 of the Companies Act, 1956?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27-3 Meaning of “company liable to be wound up” under the Act. . . . . . . . . . . . . 27-4 27.2 When a company becomes a partner of a firm, do all its shareholders become partners of the firm?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27-8 Can a company become a partner in a firm?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27-8 xxxi
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Legal status of partnership firm. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27-11 Do the shareholders of the company which becomes a partner become partners of the firm?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27-15 Chapter 28
Register & Returns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28-1
28.1 Is the right to inspect and require a copy of the register of members an unrestricted right?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28-3 Statutory framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28-3 Recent NCLT rulings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28-4 Past cases. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28-5 Whether inspection, extract or copy should be demanded for a ‘proper purpose’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28-7 Jaiprakash Industries case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28-8 The changed law in UK and its interpretation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28-9 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28-10 Chapter 29
Contract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29-1
29.1 How does a company acquire capacity to contract?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29-3 Gaining corporate personality. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29-3 Form of contracts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29-4 Acquisition by a company’s capacity to contract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29-5 Validity of a contract made by directors when company (is?) under formation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29-6 A non-existent company cannot be a party to contract. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29-7 Specific performance of a pre-incorporation contract. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29-8 29.2 What are the requirements concerning shareholding of holding company’s nominee in subsidiary?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29-10 Nominee shareholding. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29-10 Meaning of “any nominee or nominees of the company”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29-11 Meaning of “if it is necessary so to do”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29-11 Wholly-owned subsidiary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29-12 Annexure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29-14 Chapter 30
Remuneration. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-1
30.1 What is the interpretation of ‘monthly remuneration’ under section 314 of the Companies Act?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-3 30.2 Whether guarantee commission paid to director is remuneration?. . . . . . . . . 30-7 The controversy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-7 Meaning of remuneration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-7 View of Department of Company Affairs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-8 xxxii
Table of contents
View of Delhi High Court. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-9 View of Calcutta High Court. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-10 Department should reconsider its view. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-10 Position under Companies Act 2013. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-10 30.3 Can directors be paid remuneration for professional services rendered to the company?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-12 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-12 Remuneration for services of professional nature. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-13 Case law under the 1956 Act. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-14 Meaning of ‘profession’ and ‘professional’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-16 Applicability of section 188 of the 2013 Act and clause 49 of the Listing Agreement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-22 Applicability of section 149 of the 2013 Act and clause 49 of the Listing Agreement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-23 30.4 Appointment and/or remuneration of managing or wholetime director, whether board resolution constitutes contract or arrangement under sec 299 of Companies Act, 1956 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-25 The statutory provision as to director’s interests in contracts. . . . . . . . . . . . 30-25 Nature of relationship between a company and its managing director. . . . . 30-25 Whether appointment of a director is a contract or arrangement . . . . . . . . . 30-27 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-28 30.5 Can a company pay remuneration to a director for services of professional nature?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-29 Chapter 31
Related party transactions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-1
31.1 What are the critical aspects of related party transactions under section 188 of the Companies Act, 2013?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-3 Meaning of ‘related party transaction’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-4 Statutory provision under Companies Act. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-5 Basic conditions to attract section 188 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-6 Contract need not be a formal one. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-7 Meaning of ‘related party’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-8 Approval of board and members to a related party transaction. . . . . . . . . . . 31-11 Board’s approval . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-11 Members’ approval. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-11 Mandatory character of proviso. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-12 Meaning of ‘prior approval’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-13 Contract between holding and subsidiary companies . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-14 Computation of the limits under rule 15(3). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-14 xxxiii
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Audit committee’s approval. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-16 Ban on voting by related parties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-17 Solution to comply with the second proviso . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-18 Contracts at arm’s length made in the ordinary course of business. . . . . . . . 31-19 Conditions to be fulfilled. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-19 Meaning of ‘nothing in this sub-section shall apply’. . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-20 Meaning and effect of ‘transactions’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-21 Meaning and effect of ‘in its ordinary course of business’ . . . . . . . . 31-22 Meaning of ‘on an arm’s length basis’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-25 Whether exemption can be availed of in respect of contracts and arrangements in the nature of office or place of profit . . . . . . . . 31-29 Contracts or arrangement for sale, purchase or supply of goods or materials. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-30 Whether section 188 applies to transactions of sale/purchase of securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-33 Contract or arrangement for selling or otherwise disposing off, or buying, property of any kind. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-36 Contract or arrangement for leasing of property of any kind . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-36 Contract or arrangement for appointment of any agent for purchase or sale of goods, materials, services or property. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-37 Contract or arrangement for availing or rendering of any services. . . . . . . . 31-39 Interpretation of expression ‘provision of services’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-42 Contracts for personal and professional services. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-43 Contracts concerning licensing of intellectual property trademarks. 31-46 Patents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-47 Whether section 188 applies to transactions of loans and other financial transactions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-49 Contract or arrangement with respect to appointment of a related party to any office or place of profit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-50 Applicability. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-50 Ordinary meaning of ‘office or place of profit’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-50 Definition of office or place of profit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-54 Whether office holder must be company’s employee . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-55 Whether offices of professional service providers amount to office or place of profit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-56 Connotation of “total monthly remuneration”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-57 Whether appointment of managing director or whole-time director attracts section 188 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-58 Disclosure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-59 Effect of absence of consent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-59 Contract is voidable. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-59 xxxiv
Table of contents
31.2 What are critical aspects of definition of ‘related party’ under Companies Act, 2013?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-61 The definition and its analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-62 Notes:. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-65 Clause (vi) of section 2(76). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-65 Whether the definition of ‘related party’ applies to a company incorporated outside India. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-66 31.3 Whether section 197 of Companies Act, 2013 concerning directors’ remuneration applies to private companies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-69 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-69 Statutory framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-69 Analysis of subsection (1). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-70 Effect of subsection (3). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-72 Rules of interpretation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-73 Meaning of expressions ‘company’, ‘public company’ and ‘private company’. . 31-74 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-74 31.4 Can a company make ex gratia payment to the retired managing or whole-time director?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-75 Provision in memorandum and articles. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-75 31.5 What are the key provisions of the Companies Act, 2013 concerning remuneration of managerial personnel? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-81 Limit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-81 Limit for individual executive director. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-82 Limit under Part I of Schedule V. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-83 Statutory provision. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-83 31.6 Whether transactions of sale and purchase of shares amount to related party transactions under section 188 of Companies Act, 2013?. . . . 31-92 What is ‘share’ and ‘share capital’?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-92 Section 188 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-94 Chapter 32
Reserves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32-1
32.1 What is meant by the term “reserve”?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32-3 Meaning of “free reserve”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32-4 Nature of revaluation reserve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32-6 Can revaluation reserve be capitalised?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32-7 Position under English law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32-11 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32-13 32.2 Whether capital reserve is a “free reserve”?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32-14 xxxv
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Chapter 33
Audit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-1
33.1 What is secretarial auditor’s duty to report frauds?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-3 Statutory provision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-3 Reporting of fraud not to be part of secretarial audit report. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-4 Conditions to be satisfied. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-4 Punishment for failure to report. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-5 Punishment for fraud. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-5 Which frauds require reporting. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-6 Reason to believe. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-6 Definition of ‘fraud’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-7 General meaning of ‘fraud’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-8 Applicability of sec 143 to secretarial auditor. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-10 Prescribed amounts and manner of reporting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-11 33.2 What is the ambit of auditor’s duty of care and liability for negligence?. . . 33-13 Nature of duties of auditor. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-14 Liability in tort. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-17 The landmark English case. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-19 The canons of ‘foreseeability’ and ‘proximity’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-21 The ‘role’ issue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-24 Application of the ‘foreseeability’ and ‘proximity’ canons. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-25 Whether defence of ex turpi causa non oritur actio available to auditors. . . 33-26 Chapter 34
Class action. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34-1
34.1 What is the rule in Foss v Harbottle and class action under Companies Act, 2013?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34-3 Statutory provision for class action. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34-3 Object. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34-6 Different forms of shareholder remedies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34-7 The rule in Foss v Harbottle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34-11 Exceptions to the rule in Foss v Harbottle. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34-13 Wrong done to the company: who may sue? — The ‘Proper Plaintiff’ Principle. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34-17 The purpose of the rule in Foss v Harbottle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34-21 Is the Foss v Harbottle rule injurious to a minority shareholder’s interest?. 34-25 Chapter 35
Offences and liabilities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-1
35.1 What are the critical aspects of offences and liabilities under the Companies Act, 2013?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-3 Concept of ‘vicarious liability’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-5 xxxvi
Table of contents
Meaning of ‘offence’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-6 Difference between ‘offence’ and ‘prosecution’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-7 Prosecution for offences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-8 Who is entitled to prosecute?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-9 Offences to be tried by special court. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-9 How and where is prosecution to be launched . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-10 Meaning of ‘cognizable offence’ and ‘non-cognizable offence’. . . . . . . . . . 35-11 Meaning of ‘taking cognizance of offence’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-12 No personal presence necessary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-14 Period of limitation to initiate prosecution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-14 Continuing offence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-15 Condonation of delay. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-19 Liabilty of officer-in-default for offences. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-19 Who are liable for punishment?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-19 Meaning of “officer” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-20 The nature and extent of liability of an officer-in default for offences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-20 Analysis of the definition. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-22 Independent director- whether officer in default. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-23 All directors cannot be prosecuted. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-24 Relief from liability for offences. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-26 Circumstances in which an officer of a company be relieved from the liability of offence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-26 Compounding of offences. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-26 Meaning and purpose of “compounding” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-26 Effect of compounding. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-27 Compounding of offences under Companies Act 2013. . . . . . . . . . . 35-27 35.2 Can debts, tax and statutory dues of a company be recovered from its shareholders or directors?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-29 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-29 Company : independent legal person. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-30 Distinction between company and its shareholders. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-31 Company’s business is not shareholder’s business. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-32 Shareholder has no property in company’s assets. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-32 Limited liability principle. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-33 Creditors must look to company’s assets; shareholders and directors are not personally liable to pay company’s debts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-34 The principle as to taxation of company and shareholder. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-36 Cases on recovery of excise and customs dues. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-37 Recent noteworthy rulings of Bombay High Court. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-37 xxxvii
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Lifting of corporate veil. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-39 35.3 Is managing director personally liable for company’s debts?. . . . . . . . . . . . 35-42 Important question. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-42 Limited liability principle. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-42 Personal liability for company’s debt under supply contract . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-43 Personal liability for repayment of company’s loan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-44 Personal liability in respect of workers’ dues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-45 Personal liability in respect of tax dues. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-45 35.4 Whether company’s directors are personally liable for tortious acts of company?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-47 General principle. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-47 Liability for tort: general principle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-49 The ‘Direct or Procure’ test. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-51 State of mind and knowledge of defendant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-54 Liability for tortuous act passing-off and fraudulent use of name. . . . . . . . 35-56 35.5 Are directors liable for compliance regarding books of account and dividend?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-58 Directors’ duty as to true and fair view of accounts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-58 Supreme Court on directors’ duty. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-59 No dividend shall be paid except out of profits. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-60 Meaning of ‘profits’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-63 Directors’ liability for payment of dividend out of capital . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-65 Directors’ duty as to interim dividend. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-67 35.6 Whether company’s directors are liable under Indian Penal Code when a commercial contract is breached by the company?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-69 Concept of ‘vicarious liability’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-69 Relevant IPC provisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-71 What is of essence about allegations?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-72 Civil dispute vis-a-vis criminal action. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-74 Disputes relating to hire purchase transaction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-79 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-81 35.7 What is the principle of identification in respect of liability of directors for company’s offences?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-82 Company’s mind is the mind of the persons controlling the company. . . . . 35-82 The ‘identification principle’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-83
xxxviii
Table of contents
35.8 Are company’s directors and officers liable for offences and what is the principle of attribution?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-87 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-87 Recent Supreme Court judgments. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-89 What is ‘corporate criminal liability’?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-90 Corporate criminal liability and mens rea. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-92 Whose mind is deemed to be the mind of the company? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-94 The ‘directing mind and will’ concept. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-94 The attribution principle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-99 35.9 Whether directors alone can be prosecuted sans the company?. . . . . . . . . 35-101 Persons liable. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-102 View that individuals concerned cannot be prosecuted without prosecuting the company. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-102 Position of law as laid down by Supreme Court. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-103 Individuals charged should be persons responsible for conduct of company’s business. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-105 The new dispensation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-105 35.10 Can directors be held personally liable for the debts of the company under SARFAESI Act, 2002? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-108 35.11 What is corporate criminal liability and liability of directors for company’s offences?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-113 What is ‘corporate criminal liability’?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-113 Concept of ‘vicarious liability’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-116 What is ‘mens rea’?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-117 Can a company have mens rea?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-119 Knowledge and intention of its servants were to be imputed to the body corporate. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-120 Company’s mind is the mind of the persons controlling the company. . . . 35-122 35.12 Relief to directors from liabilities under section 633 of the Companies Act: can a director claim relief based on expert advice? . . . . . 35-124 A safety valve for directors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-124 Division of jurisdiction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-125 Can relief be claimed by executive/non-executive directors?. . . . . . . . . . . 35-126 Whether section 633 gives relief under other laws. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-127 Whether section 633 applies to ultra vires transactions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-128 Directors acting on expert legal advice. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-128 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-131
xxxix
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
35.13 Can directors escape liability for their colleague’s negligent conduct? . . . 35-132 35.14 Are Directors criminally liable for mis-representation in prospectus?. . . . 35-138 The ‘Golden Rule’ judgment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-138 The statutory provision for liability. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-138 Prosecution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-139 Cases in point. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-140 A classic Indian case in point . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-140 The message of Calcutta High Court. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-141 35.15 Are nominee directors liable for company’s offences?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-142 Liability under Acts other than Companies Act. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-142 Standard provisions on directors’ liability. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-143 Liability under the Income-tax Act: an instance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-144 Is a nominee director’s vicariously liable after his nomination is withdrawn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-145 Whether a nominee director entitled to being excused when a statement of affairs not filed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-147 35.16 Provisions of Companies Act, 2013 regarding avoidance of provisions relieving liability of officers of company?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-148 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-148 Provisions of Companies Act, 1956 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-148 Object. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-149 Prohibition under the section. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-150 Whether section 201 applied to indemnity provided by third party . . . . . . 35-151 Provision in the articles. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-152 Provisions of Companies Act, 2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-153 Analysis of provisions of 2013 Act. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-153 35.17 Are company directors and officers liable for contraventions under SEBI’s anti-insider trading regulations?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-155 The evil of insider trading. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-155 What is ‘insider trading’? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-155 Prohibition of insider trading. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-158 Questions presented. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-160 Discussion and answers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-160 Mens rea. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-165 Investigation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-166 35.18 Anti-insider trading law : Supreme Court on director’s duty & liability . . 35-168 The principle of identification. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-171
xl
Table of contents
Directors concerned only with policy formulation and not its implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-172 A director who has no knowledge of alleged offence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-174 Where a statute itself provides for nomination of officer responsible for compliance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-174 Why managing director is vulnerable. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-175 35.19 Anti-insider trading law : are non-executive directors liable? . . . . . . . . . . 35-178 Supreme Court’s decision. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-179 General principle as to non-executive director’s liability. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-180 The principle of identification. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-181 Directors concerned only with policy formulation and not its implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-182 A director who has no knowledge of alleged offence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-184 Where a statute itself provides for nomination of officer responsible for compliance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-185 Why managing director is vulnerable. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-186 35.20 What are the critical aspects of directors’ vicarious liability for offences by companies under various laws? – Part 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-188 35.21 What are the critical aspects of directors’ vicarious liability for offences by companies under various laws? – Part 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-201 The strict construction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-201 Scope of sub-section (2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-202 35.22 What are the critical aspects of directors’ vicarious liability for offences by companies under various laws? – Part 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-210 35.23 What are the critical aspects of directors’ vicarious liability for offences by companies under various laws? – Part 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-219 35.24 What are the critical aspects of directors’ vicarious liability for offences by companies under various laws? – Part 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-226 35.25 What is the legal remedy under the Companies Act when an employee of the company wrongfully withholds company’s property?. . . 35-233 35.26 Can a company retrieve its property withheld by its directors and employees? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-236 Effective remedy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-236 Ex-employee/officers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-237 Relatives of employee. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-237 Workman. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-238 Pendency of civil suit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-239 xli
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
35.27 What are the concepts of previous versus post facto approval? . . . . . . . . . 35-240 The tests to determine whether previous or post facto approval. . . . . . . . . 35-240 Supreme Court’s landmark decisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-241 Section 372 of Companies Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-242 Section 297 of Companies Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-243 35.28 What constitutes ‘conviction’ for the purpose of Schedule XIII to the Companies Act?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-245 Meaning of ‘offence’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-245 Disqualification under Schedule XIII to apply only if proposed appointee has been ‘convicted’ of an offence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-246 Disqualification not to be effective unless appointee has been convicted by court of law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-247
VOLUME 2 Chapter 36
Redemption of preference shares. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36-1
36.1 What are the statutory provisions and principles as regards redemption of redeemable preference shares?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36-3 Statutory framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36-3 Analysis of the provision in section 55(2). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36-4 Premium payable on redemption. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36-6 Use of money raised through rights issue. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36-6 Reduction of capital. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36-7 Chapter 37
Securities premium account. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37-1
37.1 What are the critical aspects of the provisions of the Companies Act regarding securities premium account?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37-3 Analysis of section 52. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37-3 Issue of shares at a premium. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37-4 Determination of premium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37-6 Application of securities premium account and use of money. . . . . . . . . . . . 37-7 Distribution as dividend. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37-10 Applicability of provisions regarding reduction of capital. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37-11 Chapter 38
Office or place of profit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38-1
38.1 What are the provisions of the Companies Act, 2013 relating to office or place of profit?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38-3 Contract or arrangement with respect to appointment of a related party to any office or place of profit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38-3 xlii
Table of contents
Ordinary meaning of ‘office or place of profit’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38-4 Statutory meaning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38-7 Whether office holder must be company’s employee. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38-9 Whether offices of professional service providers amount to office or place of profit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38-12 Chapter 39
Amalgamation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-1
39.1 Whether amalgamation between Indian and overseas company is possible in India?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-3 ‘Company’ versus ‘body corporate’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-4 Difference between ‘company’ and ‘body corporate’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-4 Meaning of “company liable to be wound up” under the Act. . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-5 What is a ‘foreign company’?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-8 Can a company incorporated outside India be a transferor company or a transferee company?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-9 Can the transferor company be a body corporate not being a company?. . . 39-11 39.2 Does merging authorised capital of transferor and transferee companies in amalgamation amount to “increase” in authorised capital of transferee company? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-13 Allotment of shares by transferee-company in amalgamation . . . . . . . . . . . 39-13 When should transferee-company have capital?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-14 Does merger of capital amount to ‘increase’?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-16 39.3 Is it necessary to have power of amalgamation as object in memorandum?.39-20 Sections 391-394 a “complete code”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-20 Whether memorandum should contain ‘power to amalgamate’. . . . . . . . . . 39-22 Memorandum need not contain power to amalgamate. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-23 39.4 Can a scheme of amalgamation of financially unsound company be sanctioned by court under section 391/394 of the Companies Act?. . . . . . . 39-28 The issue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-28 Earlier judgement of Bombay High Court . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-28 Dissenting cases. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-29 Back to Calcutta High Court’s recent judgment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-32 39.5 Can appointed date in amalgamation be prior to the date of incorporation of a transferee company? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-33 39.6 How to comply with annual accounts and annual general meeting provisions when companies are in amalgamation mode?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-36 The case. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-36 Discussion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-36 xliii
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
39.7 Should both the transferor and transferee companies separately move to the high court for amalgamation?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-39 Court’s powers in sanctioning arrangements, including amalgamations . . . 39-39 Department’s advice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-40 Both companies must comply with section 391 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-41 Can joint petition be made?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-43 39.8 Change of name in amalgamation of companies: should it require compliance with provisions of section 21 of Companies Act?. . . . . . . . . . . 39-45 Manner of change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-45 Judicial view . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-46 Can court dispense with section 21 compliance? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-47 Scheme of the Act. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-48 Department needs to issue instructions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-49 Should adoption of transferor company’s name be disallowed for 2 years. . 39-49 39.9 Registration of shares held by the transferor company in the name of the transferee company - does it require compliance with section 108?. . . . 39-51 Chapter 40
Business restructuring. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40-1
40.1 How does Companies Act facilitate corporate and business restructuring ?. . 40-3 What does ‘corporate restructuring’ mean?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40-3 Section 391: A boon for corporate restructuring. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40-4 Single-window clearance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40-6 Wide powers vested in court. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40-8 Meanings of the terms “compromise”, “arrangement”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40-9 Meaning of “reconstruction” and “amalgamation”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40-11 Reorganisation of share capital. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40-12 Reduction of share premium account . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40-19 Applicability of provisions regarding reduction of capital. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40-20 Reorganisation of ‘quasi capital’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40-21 Chapter 41
Compromise or Arrangement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41-1
41.1 What constitutes Compromise or Arrangement under Companies Act?. . . . . 41-3 Introductory note. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41-3 Section 391: An effective device for corporate restructuring. . . . . . . . . . . . . 41-4 Objectives and Advantages of Corporate Restructuring. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41-5 Wide scope of s. 391/394 – The Complete Code or Single Window System.41-6 Nature of the High Court’s powers in sanctioning a scheme . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41-7 Meaning of ‘compromise’, ‘arrangement’, ‘reconstruction’, ‘amalgamation’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41-8 xliv
Table of contents
Reorganisation of share capital. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41-12 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41-13 Chapter 42
Merger. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42-1
42.1 What is the importance of ‘appointed date’ in merger?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42-3 Standard clauses in amalgamation scheme. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42-3 Court’s power under section 394. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42-3 Relevance of appointed date for Income Tax purposes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42-4 The controversy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42-5 Relevance of appointed date under Sales Tax law. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42-6 Chapter 43
Directors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-1
43.1 Removal of directors under section 169 of the Companies Act -does it automatically lead to oppression of the minority?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-3 The majority rule. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-3 Statutory right of removing a director. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-4 ‘Key provision’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-5 Grounds on which a director can be removed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-6 No injunction can be granted against the meeting. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-6 Compliance with procedural and numerical formalities is crucial . . . . . . . . . 43-7 Whether explanatory statement needs to be annexed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-8 No judicial review of the reasons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-9 Vacation of office. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-10 Can removal of a director be taken as a ground of oppression of minority shareholder? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-11 Equitable considerations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-11 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-16 43.2 What are the obligations of a director regarding disclosure of interest or concern under section 184 of the Companies Act, 2013?. . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-17 Basic canons of statutory interpretation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-18 The statutory provision. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-18 Object and underlying principle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-19 Director’s duty as to disclosure of his connection with some entities under section184(1). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-21 Form of disclosure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-22 Meaning of ‘concern or interest’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-23 The requirement of disclosure of directorship. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-23 The requirement of disclosure of shareholding. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-23 Frequency of disclosure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-25 xlv
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Whether subsequent disclosure will be sufficient compliance . . . . . . . . . . . 43-26 Director’s duty as to disclosure of interest or concern in contracts or arrangements under section 184(2). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-27 Meaning and scope of ‘contract’ and ‘arrangement’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-28 Instances of concern or interest. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-30 Meaning of ‘body corporate’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-32 Consequence of non-disclosure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-32 Penalty. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-32 Compounding of certain offences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-33 Contract or arrangement voidable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-34 Vacation of office. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-34 Register. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-35 43.3 What are the statutory requirements and general principles regarding resignation by a company director?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-38 Statutory provisions relating to resignation of director. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-38 Articles may contain a provision regarding resignation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-39 Acceptance of resignation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-40 Compulsory resignation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-43 Liabilities of a director who has resigned. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-43 Rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-45 43.4 Is formal disclosure of interest by a director necessary when directors are aware of interest?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-46 Delhi High Court’s decision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-47 The statutory framework. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-47 Manner of disclosure of interest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-48 Is disclosure a mere technicality?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-48 Disclosure to a committee of directors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-50 43.5 Is acceptance of resignation of director by the board of directors compulsory?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-52 43.6 Section 164(2) of The Companies Act, 2013: What is its true scope and interpretation?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-56 The statutory provision. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-56 Whether section 164(2) has retrospective effect?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-57 Analysis of subsection (2). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-60 Basic canons of statutory interpretation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-60 When does the disqualification get attracted?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-62 Interpretation of “re-appointed” and “appointed”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-62 Section 164(2) and private companies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-62 xlvi
Table of contents
Conflict between section 164(2) and section 167(1)(a). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-63 Removal of disqualification. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-65 43.7 Does disqualification under section 164 of the Companies Act, 2013 result into vacation of office in all companies in which a person is a director?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-67 Sections 164 and 167. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-67 Difference between section 164 and 167. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-68 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-70 43.8 What are the criteria to determine independence of a director under section 149 of Companies Act, 2013?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-71 Explanation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-80 43.9 What are the criteria to determine whether a person qualifies to be an independent director under LODR Regulations? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-81 43.10 Whether it is mandatory for a private company to have directors liable to retirement by rotation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-83 Statutory requirement regarding retirement of directors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-83 Analysis and interpretation of section 152(6). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-84 Appointment of directors in a private company: director to be appointed at general meeting if articles are silent. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-85 Tenure of director appointed at general meeting. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-87 43.11 Are acts of de facto directors valid? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-89 Effect of section 290. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-91 Does the section apply where there is no appointment?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-95 43.12 What is the principle proportional representation and how does it operate in connection with appointment of directors?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-97 Option to adopt proportional representation for the appointment. . . . . . . . . 43-98 Analysis of section 265. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-100 Dictionary meaning of ‘proportional representation’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-101 Supreme Court on proportional representation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-102 Which system of proportional representation should a company adopt?. . 43-103 The effect of Article 100. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-105 Standard methods of proportional representation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-106 Method of single transferable vote. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-106 Cumulative voting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-107 Is employee appointed as alternate director a whole-time director?. . . . . . 43-108 The case. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-108 Observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-108 xlvii
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Whether section 314, 269, 309 and 198 is applicable to an alternate director who is working as a whole-time employee of the company? . . . . 43-109 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-112 43.13 Is employee appointed as alternate director a whole-time director?. . . . . . The case. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
43-113 43-113 43-113 43-117
43.14 Reduction in the number of directors below minimum: what are the consequences and remedies?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-119 When regulation 75 cannot be resorted to. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-125 43.15 What are controversial issues relating to resignation of a director?. . . . . . 43-127 Meaning of ‘resignation’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-127 Resignation and Companies Act. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-128 Withdrawal of resignation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-132 43.16 What are the various ways of passing resolutions by directors?. . . . . . . . . 43-135 Resolutions at board meetings by physical presence of directors. . . . . . . . 43-135 Resolutions at board meetings by presence of directors through video conference. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-136 Passing of resolution by circulation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-136 Resolutions by unanimous written consent of directors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-137 Difference between section 175 and Article 75. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-138 Interpretation of “save as otherwise expressly provided in the Act”. . . . . . 43-138 Relevance of English case law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-140 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-143 43.17 Can directors be held personally liable for the offence of contempt of court by the company?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-144 43.18 Are directors personally liable for company’s tax dues?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-147 Company as a legal person: The principle of independent corporate entity. . . . 43-147 Sales tax. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-148 Income tax. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-152 Customs duty. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-154 43.19 Are directors personally liable for debts and other financial obligations of the company?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-155 Attributes of corporate personality and shareholders’ limited liability. . . . 43-155 Decree against a company cannot be enforced against its shareholders or directors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-157 Limited liability: a cardinal attribute of company. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-160 xlviii
Table of contents
More cases on tax liability. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-161 Director’s liability under company’s contract. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-163 Personal liability in respect of workers’ dues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-165 Director’s liability for company’s debt under personal guarantee. . . . . . . 43-165 Nature of contract of guarantee. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-169 43.20 Do directors have the right to inspection of books of account of a company?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-173 Statutory provisions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-173 Directors’ right of inspection not liable to curtailment by Articles. . . . . . . 43-174 Nature of the right and its enforcement by order of court. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-174 Restraint on the right. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-179 Can a director inspect a company’s accounts through his agent. . . . . . . . . 43-182 Comparison with a partners’ right to inspect firm’s books . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-183 When restrictions can be imposed on a director and of what nature. . . . . . 43-183 43.21 Can a director or officer of a company file a suit or petition on behalf of and in the name of the company without proper authorisation from the board of directors?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-185 Effect of registration of a company. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-187 General powers of board . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-188 Power of attorney. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-189 Can unauthorised filing of suit be regularised by ratification. . . . . . . . . . . 43-191 43.22 Ratification of unauthorised or ultra vires acts of directors or officers of a company: how far valid? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-193 Meaning of ratification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-193 Ratification of a director’s ultra vires . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-195 Board can ratify unauthorised act of a director or officer of the company. . . . 43-197 No formal resolution is necessary for ratification. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-200 Ratification of an invalid resolution where original resolution is invalid. . 43-200 Whether special resolution can be ratified retrospectively. . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-204 43.23 Shares held by nominees of a company in its subsidiary: whether a joint shareholder who is not named first can be appointed a director of a company. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-208 Discussion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-208 Loans to Directors 44-1 Chapter 44 44.1 What does the phrase “any person in accordance with whose advice, directions or instructions the board is accustomed to act, other than one who gives advice in a professional capacity” mean?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-3 44.2 What are the powers of the chairman of the board? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-22 xlix
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
44.3 Is express delegation of powers by board of directors necessary? . . . . . . . . 44-24 General Powers of board. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-25 The board must exercise powers at its meetings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-26 Provisions in articles of association. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-27 Directors not to delegate certain powers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-28 Power to commence legal proceedings on behalf of company. . . . . . . . . . . 44-28 English Companies Act. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-29 44.4 What are the critical aspects of section 185 of Companies Act, 2013?. . . . . 44-32 Prohibitory provision. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-33 Effect of the expression ‘save as otherwise provided in this Act’. . . . . . . . . 44-35 Clause (c) of Explanation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-37 Clause (d) of Explanation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-37 Clause (e) of Explanation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-37 Indian Case Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-38 UK Case Law. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-40 MCA’s Circulars . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-42 Concluding remark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-43 44.5 Does a comfort letter attract provisions of sections 179, 185 & 186 of the Companies Act, 2013?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-44 Relevant provisions of Companies Act 2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-44 Meaning of ‘loan’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-44 Difference between loan and deposit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-45 Meaning of ‘guarantee’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-47 Principles of interpretation of documents. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-48 UK Court judgment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-48 Karnataka High Court judgment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-49 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-50 44.6 An interpretational study of the new section 185 of the Companies Act, 2013. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-51 Prohibited loans, guarantees and securities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-54 Loans, guarantees, securities permitted with members’ approval. . . . . . . . . 44-54 Exempted loans, guarantees and securities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-55 Penal consequences of contravention . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-56 Guarantees/securities must be in connection with loan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-56 Interpretation of clause (b) of subsection (2). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-57 Interpretation of clause (c) of subsection (2). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-58
l
Table of contents
Chapter 45
Retirement by rotation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45-1
45.1 What is the effect of “not less than two-thirds” and “one-third ... number nearest to one-third” in Companies Act regarding retirement of directors by rotation?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45-3 Principal rules of statutory interpretation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45-3 Provisions concerning retirement of directors by rotation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45-4 Important point of difference. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45-5 Exclusion of managing director/whole-time director. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45-7 Exclusion of additional directors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45-8 Whether alternate director is liable to retirement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45-8 Whether nominee director is liable to retirement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45-9 Whether directors appointed by central government are liable to retirement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45-10 Chapter 46
Managing director. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-1
46.1 How is a managing director appointed and removed? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-3 Appointment by whom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-3 Model article. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-4 Not liable to retirement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-5 Ipso-facto cessation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-7 Removal. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-9 Compensation for loss of office. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-10 46.2 Who can confer powers on a managing director?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-12 46.3 What is the legal status of managing director?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-16 Definition of ‘managing director’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-16 Ingredients of the definition of managing director . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-18 De jure and de facto managing director. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-19 Managing director must be a director. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-20 Is managing director an employee?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-21 ‘Dual role’ of managing director. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-23 Cases under Income-tax Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-27 How to determine relationship between company and managing director?.46-28 A vital test. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-31 Contract of employment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-35 46.4 Who has the right to remove a director from the post of managing director?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-38
li
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
46.5 What are the provisions of Companies Act, 2013 concerning appointment and remuneration of managing director and whole-time director?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-40 Section 2(54): Definition of ‘managing director’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-40 Section 190. Contract of employment with managing or whole-time directors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-41 Section 2(94): Definition of ‘whole-time director’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-43 Section 196: Appointment of managing director, whole-time director or manager. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-45 Section 197: Directors’ remuneration. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-46 46.6 What is the lawful way of termination of managing director’s contract and what are the remedies against the termination? . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-49 ‘Dual role’ of managing director. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-49 Is managing director an employee?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-51 Specific performance of managing director’s contract. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-52 Specific performance of managing director’s contract. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-53 Chapter 47
Manager . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47-1
47.1 What are the salient features of manager as a managerial personnel under the Companies Act?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47-3 Legislative history. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47-3 Characteristics. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47-4 First crucial test. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47-5 ‘Manager’ under other statutes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47-9 Second crucial test. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47-10 Third crucial test. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47-11 De facto manager. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47-12 Non-employee manager. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47-12 Managing director versus manager. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47-13 Can a company have more than one manager?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47-13 Chapter 48
Company Secretary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-1
48.1 What are some critical issues pertaining to appointment of wholetime company secretary under section 383A of Companies Act?. . . . . . . . . . 48-3 The case. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-3 Whether deputation is valid. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-3 Must secretary be the company’s employee? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-4 Significance of the expression ‘whole-time’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-6 Purposive construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-6 lii
Table of contents
Reference to external aids of interpretation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-9 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-12 48.2 Can a company secretary appointed by board of directors be removed by managing director? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-13 Punjab & Haryana High Court ruling. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-13 No special provision in Companies Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-14 Express provisions in company’s articles. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-15 Facts of Haryana Seeds Development Corporation case. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-16 Need for amendment of section 383A of the Companies Act. . . . . . . . . . . . 48-18 Ex post facto ratification of managing director’s order. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-18 48.3 What are the provisions of the Companies (Amendment) Bill relating to directors and key managerial personnel: what is the effect thereof?. . . . . 48-20 Section 2(51) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-21 1. Section 2(76) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-22 2. Section 149. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-23 3. Section 152. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-25 4. Section 153. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-25 5. Section 157. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-25 6. Section 160. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-26 7. Section 161. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-26 8. Section 164. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-27 9. 10. Section 165. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-27 11. Section 167. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-27 12. Section 168. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-28 13. Section 173. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-28 14. Section 177. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-29 15. Section 178. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-29 16. Section 180. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-30 17. Section 184. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-30 18. Section 185. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-31 Prohibited loans, guarantees and securities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-31 Loans, guarantees, securities permitted with members’ approval. . . 48-31 Exempted loans, guarantees and securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-32 Penal consequences of contravention. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-32 Guarantees/securities must be in connection with loan. . . . . . . . . . . 48-33 19. Section 186. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-34 Loans to employees exempted. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-34 Wholly-owned subsidiary company and joint venture company: No members’ approval. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-34 Exemption provision recast. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-35 liii
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
20.
21. 22.
23.
Section 188. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-36 Voting by related parties who are members. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-36 Avoiding related party transaction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-36 Definition of related party . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-37 Definitions of ‘holding company’ and ‘subsidiary company’ . . . . . . 48-37 Section 196. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-38 Section 197. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-39 Government approval dispensed with . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-39 Excess remuneration to require special resolution. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-39 Bank and financial institution approval. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-39 Remuneration when loss or inadequate profit: Government approval dispensed with. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-40 Recovery of excess remuneration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-40 Auditor’s duty to report. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-41 Pending applications to abate. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-41 Section 198. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-42
48.4 Who can terminate the appointment of a company secretary?. . . . . . . . . . . 48-43 Punjab & Haryana High Court ruling. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-43 No special provision in Companies Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-43 Express provisions in company’s articles. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-44 Facts of Haryana Seeds Development Corporation case. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-45 Ratification. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-47 Specific performance of managing employment contract. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-48 Chapter 49
Board meeting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-1
49.1 What are the consequences of improper notice for the board meeting?. . . . . 49-3 49.2 Can the chairman of a meeting have a casting vote?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-6 Statutory provision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-6 Meaning of ‘casting vote’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-7 The underlying principle. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-8 Is the casting vote a ‘second vote’?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-8 Can chairman use casting vote when he does not have deliberative vote?. . . 49-9 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-10 49.3 Can a director appoint a proxy to attend board meeting?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-11 The issue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-11 Alternate director. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-12 Can articles confer the right. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-12 (i) Section 287 (quorum for meetings). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-13 (ii) Section 300 (Interested director not to participate or vote in board’s proceedings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-13 liv
Table of contents
(iii) (iv) (v) (vi)
Section 299 (Disclosure of interest by director). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-13 Section 297 (Board’s sanction to be required for certain contracts in which particular directors are interested). . . . . . . . . . . . 49-14 Section 283 (Vacation of office of director). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-14 Section 193(4) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-14
49.4 Standing and informal notices of board meetings: are they valid?. . . . . . . . 49-17 Standing notice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-18 Informal notice of board meeting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-18 49.5 Are board decisions valid, when: one director present at meeting; director holding power of attorney holder; the matter not within board’s powers to decide?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-20 Whether one director present constitutes quorum at board meeting. . . . . . . 49-20 Whether one director attending as a power of attorney holder of another director. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-22 Whether a decision at a board meeting of a matter which is not within board’s purview is invalid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-24 49.6 What are the provisions of companies Act, 2013 concerning board meeting by video/tele-conferencing?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-26 Conventional meaning of ‘meeting’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-26 UK Court’s landmark decision on interpretation of ‘meeting’. . . . . . . . . . . 49-27 First attempt to incorporate provision concerning videoconference meeting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-28 Companies Act, 2013. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-29 Analysis and interpretation of the statutory provisions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-33 49.7 In what different ways can board pass resolutions? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-36 Resolutions at board meetings by physical presence of directors. . . . . . . . . 49-36 Resolutions at board meetings by presence of directors through video conference. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-37 Passing of resolution by circulation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-37 Resolutions by unanimous written consent of directors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-38 Difference between section 175 and Article 75. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-38 Interpretation of “save as otherwise expressly provided in the Act”. . . . . . . 49-39 Relevance of English case law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-41 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-44 49.8 Disinterested quorum at board meetings: is a director whose relative is to be appointed as a director ‘interested’ in the resolution?. . . . . . . . . . . . 49-45 49.9 Why ‘confirmation’ of minutes of a previous meeting is an improper practice?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-48 lv
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
49.10 Do minutes constitute conclusive evidence of proceedings of meetings?. . . 49-51 Importance of minutes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-51 Minutes as presumptive evidence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-51 49.11 What are the critical aspects of meetings of board of a private company?. . 49-54 Statutory provisions regarding board meetings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-54 (a) Number of meetings 49-54 49-55 (b) Board meeting through video-conference (c) Who can convene a board meeting? 49-56 (d) Notice of board meeting 49-56 (e) When notice is not required 49-59 (f) Quorum for board meetings 49-60 (g) Disinterested quorum 49-61 (h) Adjournment of board meeting for want of quorum 49-62 (i) Notice of an adjourned meeting 49-63 Circular resolution. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-63 Matters which cannot be decided by circular resolution. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-64 Minutes of board and general meetings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-66 Requirements under Companies Act regarding minutes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-66 Inspection of minutes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-69 49.12 Sale of company’s property: can a derivative action by a shareholder lie?. . 49-71 The rule in Foss v Harbottle. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-72 Wrong done to the company: who may sue?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-76 The ‘proper plaintiff’ principle. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-79 49.13 What does ‘disinterested quorum’ mean in regard to meetings of board of directors? what are its critical aspects?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-81 Quorum for meetings of Board. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-81 Consequences of transaction of business without quorum. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-81 Special requirement under articles of association or shareholders’ agreement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-83 Statutory quorum. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-83 A director may attend a meeting physically or through video-conference.. . 49-84 One director present does not constitute quorum at board meeting . . . . . . . 49-85 Disinterested quorum. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-85 General principles regarding disinterested quorum. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-86 49.14 Is a one-director meeting valid? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-88 Presence of one person does not constitute meeting. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-88 Quorum at board meetings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-90
lvi
Table of contents
Chapter 50
Meetings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-1
50.1 What is the effect of the provision in section 174(2) of the Companies Act, 2013. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-3 Statutory provisions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-3 Prominent cases. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-4 Effect of the words “if and so long as”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-5 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-7 50.2 What are the critical aspects of section 185 of the Companies Act, 2013?. . . 50-9 Applicability of section 185 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-9 Parties covered. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-10 Various clauses of explanation explained. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-11 Shadow director under UK Companies Act. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-17 Clause (e) and holding-subsidiary relationship. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-22 Exemptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-24 Exemption under clause (a). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-24 Exemption under clause (b). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-24 Exemption under clause (c). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-26 Exemption under clause (d). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-26 Loans to a subsidiary and guarantee/security on behalf of a subsidiary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-26 Meaning of loan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-27 Meaning of ‘indirect loan’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-29 Difference between loan and deposit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-31 Difference between loan and debt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-34 Difference between loan and advance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-35 Meaning of ‘guarantee’ and ‘security’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-36 Effect of ‘including any loan represented by a book debt’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-37 Applicability of section 179 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-39 50.3 What is the modern interpretation of the term ‘meeting’? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-40 50.4 Does presence of only one member constitute a valid meeting?. . . . . . . . . . 50-45 50.5 Can a company cancel or postpone a general meeting already called?. . . . . 50-49 50.6 What are the powers of the chairman in respect of adjournment of a meeting?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-55 50.7 Can a general meeting convened by a company be injuncted by a court? . . 50-60 The principle of judicial non-interference in domestic affairs of a company. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-60
lvii
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Prominent cases in which courts refused to restrain holding of general meeting. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-61 No injunction should be granted against holding of extra-ordinary general meeting requisitioned by shareholders. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-64 The Supreme Court’s landmark judgment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-65 Principles as to ex parte injunctions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-66 Geographical jurisdiction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-67 50.8 Can chairman of a general meeting adjourn without shareholders’ consent?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-68 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-68 General principle. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-68 Chairman’s power besides the articles. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-71 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-74 50.9 Can a single shareholder move a resolution at a company meeting? . . . . . . 50-75 Resolution for removal of a director – position in Britain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-75 Provisions governing proposals for election of directors in the Act. . . . . . . 50-77 Sachar Committee’s recommendation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-79 Should support of a minimum number of members be laid down as condition for moving a resolution. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-79 50.10 Can a resolution be amended at general meeting? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-81 Bombay High Court case. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-81 Principles governing amendment to resolution. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-82 Amendment must be germane to resolution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-83 Chairman’s duty as to amendments. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-85 Procedure as to amendment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-88 50.11 When majority shareholder becomes helpless in holding general meeting other than annual general meeting?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-89 50.12 Can a meeting of one class of shareholder attend the meeting of another class?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-93 Query. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-93 Observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-94 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-96 50.13 In which situations can the Company Law Board order calling of a company’s meeting? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-97 50.14 How to hold a general meeting when dispute arises between shareholders?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-109
lviii
Table of contents
50.15 How many days’ notice is necessary for AGM?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Case study. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Observation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
50-112 50-112 50-112 50-113
50.16 What is the cure for default in holding AGM? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-115 50.17 What exemptions are granted for general meetings of private companies by notifications issued by MCA under section 462 of the Companies Act, 2013?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-119 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-119 Interpretation of “unless otherwise specified in respective sections or the articles of the company provide otherwise” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-120 Case law under section 170 of the Companies Act 1956 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-121 Applicability of section 102 to private company. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-123 Can articles exclude the right to demand poll?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-123 Whether section 6 affects provisions in articles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-125 Can articles provide for a quorum of one person?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-125 50.18 How should voting on resolutions be taken at a general meeting of a private company?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-126 50.19 What are the powers of NCLT to call company meetings under section 98 of the Companies Act, 2013?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-128 Statutory provision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-128 Power to be exercised when there exists impracticability. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-129 What constitutes ‘impracticability’?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-130 50.20 Is unanimous consent of all shareholders as valid as a resolution passed at a meeting? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-140 Provisions under English Companies Act. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-143 Case law. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-144 How a resolution should be passed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-148 50.21 Can a private company hold annual general meeting anywhere in India?. 50-149 Principles of statutory interpretation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-150 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-152 Chapter 51
Voting rights. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-1
51.1 What are the voting rights in the case of joint shareholders?. . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-3 51.2 Voting rights of preference shareholders: what are consequences of the change in law?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-6 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-6 lix
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
A.
B.
The law under the Companies Act, 1956. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-7 The statutory provision. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-7 Limited voting rights. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-8 Unlimited voting rights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-9 When a dividend is deemed to be ‘due’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-11 Interpretation of the word ‘due’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-11 Summing-up. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-15 The law under the Companies Act, 2013. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-15 The statutory provision. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-15 Whether section 47 is retrospective in operation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-16 Position under section 47 of the 2013 Act. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-18 How to count two years. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-19 Whether voting rights would be acquired on non-cumulative preference shares . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-20 Whether unlimited voting rights are perpetual. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-20 Whether section 47 applies to private companies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-20
51.3 Can a company pass any and every resolution by postal ballot?. . . . . . . . . . 51-21 51.4 Can shareholders right to vote be restricted?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-25 The general principle as to right to vote . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-25 Restraint on the voting right - equitable obligation of majority shareholder.51-27 51.5 Does a chairman of a general, board and committee meeting have casting vote? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-30 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-30 Meaning of ‘casting vote’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-31 The underlying principle. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-32 Is the casting vote a ‘second vote’?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-33 Can chairman use casting vote when he does not have deliberative vote?. . 51-33 Absence of provision in the 2013 Act. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-35 Effect of non-availability of casting vote . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-36 51.6 What are the critical aspects of voting rights of members of a private company?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-37 Voting rights of members. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-38 Weighted voting rights. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-40 Whether preference shares with voting rights can be issued. . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-44 Chapter 52
Proxies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52-1
52.1 What is the legal status of un-stamped proxies?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52-3 Relevant provisions of Indian Stamp Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52-3 Unstamped proxy not void . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52-5 Two Bombay High Court cases. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52-5 lx
Table of contents
Madras High Court case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52-7 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52-9 52.2 Can invitation be sent to appoint proxies?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52-10 Company’s duty of disclosure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52-10 Invitation to appoint proxies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52-11 52.3 Is a proxy received by fax valid?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52-14 52.4 In which situations proxy stands revoked?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52-17 Relationship between proxy and member. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52-17 Revocation of proxy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52-17 Judicial propositions on revocation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52-18 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52-21 52.5 Can a body corporate appoint two or more representatives to attend a general meeting under section 187 of the Companies Act, 1956?. . . . . . . . . 52-23 Can a body corporate appoint two or more representatives?. . . . . . . . . . . . . 52-26 Chapter 53
Notice. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53-1
53.1 What are the critical aspects of notice of general meeting under Companies Act?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53-3 Length of notice for calling meeting in case of private/public companies. . . 53-3 Service of notice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53-4 Computation of period of twenty-one days. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53-4 Accidental omission to give notice. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53-7 Notice – When deemed to have been served. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53-8 Service of notice by post. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53-8 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53-10 53.2 Can members of a private company have weighted voting rights?. . . . . . . . 53-11 Unique position of private company. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53-11 Shareholders’ voting rights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53-12 Removal of director. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53-13 The Bushell v Faith principle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53-15 Private company stands on a different footing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53-17 Would such a provision offend ‘a company cannot deprive itself of power to alter articles’ principle? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53-18 Voting rights in deemed public companies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53-19 53.3
Can a company add an item to notice after it is despatched?. . . . . . . . . . . . 53-21 Requirements as to notice. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53-21 Shorter notice. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53-23 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53-25 lxi
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Chapter 54
Quorum. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54-1
54.1 What is the remedy available when it is not possible for a company to hold annual general meeting due to lack of quorum?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54-3 Query. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54-3 Observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54-3 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54-5 Chapter 55
Oppression and mismanagement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-1
55.1 Why is “World Wide Agencies (P.) Ltd. v Mrs. Margaret T. Desor” a landmark judgment concerning oppression of minority shareholder? . . . . . . 55-3 The decision of Supreme Court. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-3 Definition of ‘member’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-4 Conditions stipulated in section 41(2) are cumulative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-4 Supreme Court creates an exception. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-4 Scope of Supreme Court’s ruling. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-5 55.2 What ought to be the focus of attention in proceedings under section 397 of the Companies Act?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-8 The case in point. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-8 Object of section 397 and spectrum of CLB’s powers? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-9 Compliance with law- how far relevant in section 397 proceedings?. . . . . . 55-11 The majority rule and minority oppression. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-12 The ‘just and equitable’ principle and majority shareholder’s duty towards minority. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-13 A lawful act may, but an unlawful act may not, be oppressive. . . . . . . . . . . 55-15 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-18 55.3 What is the spectrum of powers of Company Law Board as to the granting of relief to the petitioner under section 397/398 of Companies Act?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-19 Wide spectrum of CLB’s powers under sections 397/398. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-19 Interpretation of the words “as it thinks fit” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-20 Judicial exposition on wide powers of CLB. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-21 Is CLB constrained by the prayers in the petition?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-23 55.4 Protection of minority shareholder against majority power in a pvt. ltd. company: why is there a conflict between legal rights and equitable considerations?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-29 Why is formalisation of shareholders’ relationship in a private company desirable?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-29 Remedies to safeguard a minority of company members. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-30 lxii
Table of contents
Role of section 397 in protecting the minority . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-31 The focus of section 397. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-32 What is ‘equity’?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-33 Equitable considerations versus legal rights. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-34 What are ‘equitable considerations’ and why they are relevant in sec. 397 proceedings? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-36 A lawful act may be oppressive, while an unlawful may not be oppressive.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-38 Application of equitable considerations in the case of quasipartnership company. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-40 55.5 Can the Company Law Board pass an order under section 397/398 even when oppression/mismanagement is not established? . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-45 A nebulous issue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-45 Cases against. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-47 The wide spectrum of CLB’s powers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-50 Does only the Supreme Court have power to grant relief when case for oppression not made out?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-54 55.6 Minority oppression- is the doctrine of ‘legitimate expectation’ inapplicable in respect of proceedings under section 397 of the Companies Act, 1956?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-55 Can legitimate expectation be presumed?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-57 55.7 Why is issue of further shares in a private company, to dilute the minority shareholding, a powerful but unsafe device?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-63 Power to issues shares in a private company. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-63 Limitation of the board’s power . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-65 Note of caution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-69 55.8 Does the ‘clean hands’ doctrine go too far in the proceedings under section 397/398 of the Companies Act? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-71 The case in point. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-71 Nature of CLB’s jurisdiction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-71 What is ‘clean hands’ doctrine?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-72 Why is the clean hands doctrine relevant in proceedings under sec. 397?. . 55-73 The English Act dispensed with winding-up requirement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-73 What is the scope and limitation of the ‘clean hands’ doctrine?. . . . . . . . . . 55-74 Is the ‘clean hands’ principle overstretched in proceedings before CLB? . . 55-75 Petitioner’s conduct should be causative of breakdown of confidence. . . . . 55-76
lxiii
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
55.9 Why do the section 397-proceedings often get entrapped in legalityillegality conflict rather than focusing on ‘oppressive conduct’?. . . . . . . . . 55-78 The object of section 397. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-78 Law versus equity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-88 Should law take precedence over equity in proceedings under section 397?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-89 The statutory provision. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-89 Equitable remedy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-90 The ‘just and equitable’ principle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-92 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-92 55.10 Exclusion from management and expulsion from employment / directorship - is it oppression under section 397 of the Companies Act?. . . 55-93 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-93 Recent Madras High Court judgment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-94 A celebrated decision of House of Lords. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-94 A classic Indian case. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-96 A significant English case. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-97 Application of the principle where a shareholder is removed from directorship or excluded from management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-98 Whether winding-up on just and equitable ground is confined to deadlock situation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-102 55.11 Removal of director representing minority shareholder in breach of shareholders’ agreement: whether it constitutes minority oppression?. . . . 55-109 55.12 Does the Company Law Board have power to order division of a company or its property in a petition under section 397/398 of the Companies Act?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-113 The spectrum of CLB’s powers u/s. 397/398 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-113 55.13 Oppression & mismanagement: does the CLB have jurisdiction to pass order against subsidiary or holding company of the respondent company?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-121 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-121 A celebrated English case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-122 Do the affairs of the holding company cover affairs of a subsidiary?. . . . . 55-124 Indian scenario. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-125 55.14 Are principles of dissolution of partnership applicable in respect of winding up of a quasi-partnership company?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-127 55.15 Whether excessive remuneration drawn by directors amounts to oppressive conduct?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-133 Use of company’s property by directors for personal advantage . . . . . . . . 55-133 lxiv
Table of contents
55.16 What is the locus standi of the petitioner in a petition under section 397/398 of the Companies Act?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-136 Who can make a petition?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-136 ‘Member’, ‘shareholder’ and ‘the holder of a share’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-137 Who is a member?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-138 When does a person acquire status of ‘member’?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-138 Relation between transferor and transferee. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-141 When does transferee become member?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-142 Can a person whose name is not the register of members file a petition? . . . . 55-142 Supreme Court’s decision in World Wide Agencies case: The right of a legal representative of deceased member to make a petition. . . . . . . . . . 55-144 55.17 What is a ‘representative petition’ under section 397/398 of the Companies Act?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-146 Consent to filling of a petition. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-147 Interpretation of the expression ‘consent in writing’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-147 Consent to be a conscious consent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-148 Supreme Court stresses “a broad commonsense approach”. . . . . . . . . . . . 55-151 Chapter 56
Principle of natural justice. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56-1
56.1 Is the central government bound by the principles of natural justice while exercising powers under the Companies Act?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56-3 Section 408 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56-5 Section 399 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56-7 Section 237 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56-8 Section 269 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56-10 Section 314 (1B). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56-12 Section 637A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56-14 Section 108 D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56-15 Section 294 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56-17 Section 138 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56-18 Chapter 57
Charge. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57-1
57.1 What is the effect of non-registration of charge on secured creditors?. . . . . . 57-3 57.2 Can a charge be registered when a company goes into winding-up? . . . . . . . 57-7 57.3 Does non-registration of charge entitle decree-holder to avoid the charge?.57-13 Effect of non-registration of charge. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57-13 Unregistered charge is enforceable against unsecured creditors in case of a going concern. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57-13 lxv
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Position of unsecured creditor purchasing property comprised in an unregistered charge. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57-14 Some judicial pronouncements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57-14 Unregistered charge is void against liquidator and creditors in liquidation proceedings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57-16 Decree-holder creditor who purchases property subject to unregistered charge cannot contend that his purchase is free from charge. . 57-16 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57-18 57.4 Is the certificate of registration of charges conclusive evidence of the registration?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57-19 Registrar’s duty. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57-19 Effect of certificate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57-20 The strength and weakness of certificate. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57-20 The judicial history. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57-21 Judicial reviews. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57-24 Indian scenario. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57-25 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57-27 Chapter 58
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1999. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58-1
58.1 Can/may CLB refuse to entertain a petition if arbitration agreement exists between the parties? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58-3 Surender Bahety v. Ratika Computronix P. Ltd [2010] 157 Comp Cas 225 (CLB). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58-7 Oppression and mismanagement- whether CLB can refer the parties to arbitration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58-7 Chapter 59
Doctrine of ‘indoor management’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59-1
59.1 What is the doctrine of ‘indoor management’ and how does it apply to companies? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59-3 The case. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59-3 The doctrine of ‘indoor management’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59-3 Chapter 60
Doctrine of ratification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60-1
60.1 What is the doctrine of ratification of prior unauthorised acts? . . . . . . . . . . . 60-3 Prologue. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60-3 The doctrine of ratification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60-4 Product of law of agency. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60-5 Ratification of a director’s ultra vires act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60-7 Ratification of an invalid resolution where original resolution is invalid. . . 60-16 lxvi
Table of contents
Whether special resolution can be ratified retrospectively. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60-20 Ratification must not be too late . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60-24 Chapter 61
Prospective or retrospective operation of a statute. . . . . . . . . . . . 61-1
61.1 What are the principles regarding prospective or retrospective operation of a statute?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-3 General principle- the presumption against retrospectivity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-4 Substantive provision versus procedural provision. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-7 Chapter 62
Time limit expressions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62-1
62.1 How to interpret expressions concerning time limit in terms of days?. . . . . . 62-3 Standard expressions used in statutes as to length of time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62-3 Interpretation of ‘within …. days of/from’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62-4 Difference between ‘within’ and ‘not less than’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62-7 Meaning of ‘day’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62-8 Fractions of a day or date . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62-9 The concept of clear day(s). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62-10 Interpretation of ‘after the date’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62-13 Difference between ‘at the end of’ and ‘after the end of’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62-13 Chapter 63
Interpretation of law. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63-1
63.1 What is ‘dynamic interpretation’ of law? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63-3 Statutory interpretation vis-à-vis technological developments. . . . . . . . . . . . 63-4 Interpretation of ‘writing’ or ‘written’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63-10 Interpretation of ‘meeting’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63-12 Interpretation of ‘printed’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63-13 Chapter 64
Conclusive evidence of a transaction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-1
64.1 What is the effect of a statutory provision making a document conclusive evidence of a transaction?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-3 Certificate of incorporation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-3 Scope of conclusiveness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-4 Certificate of registration of a charge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-6 Registrar’s duty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-6 Effect of certificate of charge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-6 The strength and weakness of certificate. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-7 The judicial history. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-8 Judicial review. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-10 Indian scenario. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-12 Registers of members . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-13 lxvii
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Register is prima facie evidence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-13 Register is not conclusive evidence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-15 Minutes of meetings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-16 Presumption to be drawn from minutes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-18 Chapter 65
Period of time. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-1
65.1 What principles relating to computation of period of time are laid down in statutes and legal documents?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-3 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-3 Standard expressions used in statutes as to length of time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-4 Within … days from …. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-4 Within … days of. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-5 Within … month(s) from the date . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-5 Within … months of …. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-5 Within a period of …. days from. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-5 Within … months after. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-5 Within a period of …. months. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-5 Not exceeding … month(s) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-5 After the expiry of the period of .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-6 Within such time as may be prescribed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-6 Within … year(s) after ….. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-6 After … year(s) of …. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-6 From a date not earlier than. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-6 Not later than ... day(s). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-6 ‘Forthwith’, ‘immediately’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-6 Within a reasonable time. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-7 As soon as possible/practicable. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-7 Till, Until . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-7 From - To. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-7 By. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-7 Between … and …... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-8 During. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-8 How to count days. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-8 Meaning of ‘day’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-8 Fractions of a day or date. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-10 The concept of clear day(s) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-10 Meaning of ‘date’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-13 Meaning of ‘not earlier than’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-14 Computation of period when the expression ‘on and from’ or ‘on and after’ or ‘on or before’ is used. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-14
lxviii
Table of contents
Meaning of ‘commencing on’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-16 Computation of time when the expression “within … days/months from/of/after” is used. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-16 Computation of time when last day for doing an act is a holiday. . . . . . . . . 65-22 Computing week(s). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-24 Computing month(s). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-24 Meaning of ‘month’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-24 Month and days are not the same thing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-28 Computing year(s). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-29 Meaning of ‘year’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-29 Meaning of ‘calendar year’ and ‘twelve months’ and ‘twelve calendar months’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-30 Chapter 66
Serving of document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66-1
66.1 When is a document sent by post deemed to be served?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66-3 Presumption as to ‘service’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66-3 Provisions of the Companies Act, 2013 and Rules. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66-4 General principles as to service of a document by post . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66-6 Comparison between section 27 and section 53. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66-7 Cases under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (NI Act) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66-9 Service of documents on a company. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66-10 Provisions of the Companies Act and Code of Civil Procedure analysed. . . 66-11 Calcutta High Court’s decision. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66-11 Supreme Court’s view. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66-12 Whether registered post includes speed post. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66-13 Judgments under Transfer of Property Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66-13 Chapter 67
Legal status of documents. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67-1
67.1 What is the legal status of circulars and clarifications issued by the government under the Companies Act?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67-3 Power to issue circulars. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67-4 General principles as to conflict between statute and circular. . . . . . . . . . . . . 67-5 Circulars under Income Tax Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67-5 Circulars issued under Sales Tax law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67-7 Judicial views on circulars issued under Companies Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67-7 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67-10
lxix
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Chapter 68
Jurisdiction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68-1
68.1 What is the significance of jurisdiction clause in contracts for ouster of jurisdiction?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68-3 Jurisdictional provision. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68-3 What is ‘cause of action’?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68-4 Relevant provisions of the Indian Contract Act. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68-5 Ouster of jurisdiction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68-5 Case under consumer Protection Act. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68-8 Suit against corporation – effect of Explanation to section 20 of Civil Procedure Code. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68-9 Reiteration of the law by Supreme Court . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68-10 Chapter 69
Non-compete and confidentiality clause. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69-1
69.1 What is the significance of non-compete and confidentiality clauses in employment and consultancy agreements?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69-3 Questions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69-3 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69-3 Section 27 of The Contract Act, 1872. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69-5 Restraints operative during the employment term. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69-6 Restraint operative after the term of the employment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69-6 Effect of employee resigning and voluntarily retiring from service on contract of confidentiality of information between employer and employee. . . . 69-8 Lifting of corporate veil. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69-9
lxx
Table of cases 20th Century Finance Corporation Ltd. v RFB Latex Ltd. (1999) 34 CLA 267, (1999) 97 Comp Cas 636: (2000) 1 Comp LJ 104 (CLB). . . . . . . . . . . . . 58-4 20th Century Finance Corporattion Ltd v Union of India [2011] 161 Comp Cas 247 (Delhi) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58-7 A & B C Chewing Gum Ltd, Re, [1975] 1 All ER 1017 (Ch D) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-111 A Ananthalakshmi Ammal v Indian Trades and Investments Ltd [1952] 22 Comp Cas 324 (Mad); AIR 1953 Mad 467. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-123, 50-6 A Bapiraju v District Registrar AIR 1968 AP 142.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-107 A Company Re (No. 005685 of 1988), [1989] BCLC 427 (Ch D). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-38 A Company, Re, (1987) BCLC 82 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-92, 14-155, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-89, 14-152, 55-66 A Company, Re, (No 001761 of 1986) , (1987) BCLC 141. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-123 A Company, Re, (No. 005285 of 1985), [1986] 1 WLR 281. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-114 A Company, Re, No. 004175 of 1986, (1987) 3 BCC 41: (1987) BCLC 574 (Ch D). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-49 A Company, Re, No. 00477 of 1986, Re [1986] 2 BCC 99, 171. . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-34, 55-43 A K Menon v Fairgrowth Financial Services Ltd. [1995] 16 CLA 364. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-44 A Sivasailam v Registrar of Companies (1995) 83 Comp Cas 141 (CLB) . . . . . . . . . . 43-49 A Solicitor’s Clerk, Re, [1957] 3 All ER 617. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-20 A. V. M. Sales Corporation v Anuradha Chemicals Pvt Ltd 2012 AIR SCW 1028. . . . 68-10 A.A. Calton v Director of Education 1983 (2) SCR 598: AIR 1983 SC 1143: 1983 (3) SCC 33: 1983 (1) Scale 316. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-9, 61-15 A.B.C. Laminart (P.) Ltd. v A. P. Agencies AIR 1969 SC 1239. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68-4 A.D. Choudhary v. Mysore Paper Mills Ltd. [1976] 46 Comp Cas 548 . . . . . 50-106, 50-136 A.K. Kraipak v. Union of India reported in A.I.R. 1970 S.C. 150. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56-3 Aasia Properties Development Ltd v Juhu Beach Resorts Ltd [2007] 140 Comp Cas 18 (CLB). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-60 Abani Bhushan Bhattacharya v Ericsson India Pvt Ltd (1997) 27 CLA 180. . . . . . . . . 14-73 Abbey Leisure Ltd,. Re, [1989] 5 BCC 182 (Ch D). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-61 Abdul Huq v Katpadi Industries Ltd AIR 1960 Mad 482. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-40, 43-42, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-52, 43-128 Abdul Quayaum Ansari v State of Maharashtra (1991) 70 Comp Cas 368 (Bom) . . . . . . 35-237 Abdul Shakur v Rikhab Chand AIR 1958 SC 52: (1958) SCR 387. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38-10 Abdul Vahed Abdul Karim v Hasanali Alibhai Ghasia AIR 1926 Bom 338 . . . 21-44, 55-140 Aberdeen Rly. Co. v Blaikie Bros (1854) 1 Macq 461 (HL): (1843-60) All ER 249. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-20 lxxi
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Abhilash Vinod Kumar Jain v Cox & King’s (India) Ltd. (1995) 17 CLA 90 (SC). . . 35-237 Adams v. Cape Industries Plc. [1991] 1 All ER 929 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-37 Additional Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi v Om Oils & Oil Seeds Exchange Limited 1985 (152) ITR 552 Del (DB): (1985) 51 Comp Cas 592. . . . . 40-19 Additional District Magistrate (Rev.) Delhi Administration v. Shri Ram AIR 2000 SC 2143. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-60, 43-66 Afcons Infrastructure Ltd v Cherian Varkey Construction Co Pvt Ltd 2010 AIR SCW 4983 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-13, 14-42, 48-8 Afovos Shipping Co. SA v R. Pagnan and F. Lli [1982] 3 All ER 18; 1983] 1 WLR 195. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-15 Ahmedabad Mfg & Calico Printing Co Ltd v Union of India (1983) 53 Comp Cas 904 (Guj). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24-10 Ahmmadsahab Abdul Mulla v Bibijan (2008) 5 SCC 361. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-13 Ajanta India Ltd. v. Ajanta Ltd. 2009 (39) PTC 121 (Delhi). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-5, 13-4 Ajay Kumar Das v State of Orissa, 2009 AIR SCW 5511. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67-4 Ajit Kumar Sarkar v Assistant Registrar of Companies (1979) 49 Comp Cas 909 (Cal) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-9, 35-17 AL AR Arunachalam Chettiar Firm v Kaleeswarar Mills Ltd (1956) 26 Comp Cas 431 (Mad). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-18 Al Saudi Banque v Clark [1989] 5 BCC 823. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-22 Al Saudi Banque v Clark Pixley [1989] All ER 361:[1989] 5 BCC 822:[1990] Ch 313:[1990] 2 WLR 344. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-18 Albert Judah Judah v Ramapada Gupta (supra).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-60 Alembic Ltd, Re, [2008] 144 Comp Cas 105 (Guj).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15-26 Alexander v Automatic Telephone Co (1900) 2 Ch 56. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34-15, 49-76 Alexander Ward & Co. Ltd. v Samyang Navigation Co. Ltd. (1975) SC 26 (HL).. . . . . . . . 9-63 Alfred William Domingo v L C De Souza AIR 1928 All 481 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-44, 55-139 Alibagh Municipal Board v Ekka Tonga Mazdoor Union (1970) 3 SCC 98. . . . . . . . 43-145 All India Bank Officer’s Confederation v Dhanalakashmi Bank Ltd. (1997) 90 Comp Cas 225: (1997) 13 SCL 6: (1997) 26 CLA 33 (CLB)(Chennai). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-12 All India Railway Men’s Benefit Fund v Jamadar Baheshwarnath Bali (1945) 15 Comp Cas 142 : AIR 1945 Nag 187. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53-18 All India Reporter Ltd. v. Union of India (CNR 44 (1982) C/390) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56-13 Allen v Gold Reefs of West Africa Ltd (1900) 1 Ch 656 (CA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34-15, 53-18 Alma Spinning Co, Re, (1880) 16 Ch D 681.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-123 Al-Nakib Investments (Jersey) Ltd, v Longcroff [1990] BCC 517 (Ch D). . . . . . . . . . 33-22 Alote Estate v R. B. Seth Hiralal Kalyanmal KasliwalAIR 1971 SC 920; [1970] 40 Comp Cas 1116 (SC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-19 Altitude Scaffolding Ltd, Re, [2007] 1 BCLC 199 (Ch D). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-44, 50-48 lxxii
Table of cases
Am. Fuel Corp. v. Utah Energy Dev. Co., 122 F.3d 130, 134 (2d Cir. 1997). . . . . . 2-44, 8-11 Ambala Bus Syndicate Pvt Ltd. v Roop Nagar Credit & Investment Co. Pvt Ltd. (1997) 88 Comp Cas 821 (P&H).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-28 Ambrose Lake Tin and Copper Co, Re, (1878) 8 Ch D 635. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-128 Amit Suresh Bhatnagar v. Income Tax Officer [2009] 147 Comp Cas 576(Guj). . . . . 43-153 AMM Thuppan Nambiar v Official Liquidator [1954] 24 Comp Cas 489. . . . . . . . 57-5, 57-9 Amraoti Electric Supply Co v Chandak (R S) (1954) 24 Comp Cas 465 (Nag).. . . . . . 21-67 Amrendra Krishna Dutt v Monimunjary Debi (1921) 66 IC 586. . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-46, 21-44, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-139, 55-143 Amrit Kaur Puri v Kapurthala Flour Oil & General Mills Pvt Ltd (1984) 56 Comp Cas 194 (P&H) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-5, 11-7, 11-24, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-32, 49-90 Amrita Media P. Ltd v Amrita Bazar Patrika P. Ltd [2012] 175 Comp Cas 342 (CLB) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-138 Amritlal Chum v Devo Prasad Dutta Roy (1988) 1 Comp LJ 167. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-237 Amritsar Raaayon & Silk Mills Ltd v Amin Chand Sajdeh (1988) 64 Comp Cas 762 (P&H): (1989) 1 Comp LJ 39 (P&H) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-34 Anant Gopal Sheorey v State of Bombay AIR 1958 SC 915: 1958 (2) Mad LJ (SC) 207: 1958 SCJ 1231: 1959 SCR 919 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-15 Anantha Hegde v Capt. T S Gopalkrishna (1996) 3 Comp LJ 333: (1998) 91 Comp Cas 312 (Kar) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-246 Ananthalakshmi Ammal (A) v Indian Trades and Investments Ltd (1952) 22 Comp Cas 324 (Mad): AIR 1953 Mad 467.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-123 Anderson v James Sutherland (Peterhead) Ltd. 1941 AC 203. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-26, 46-24, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-41, 46-49 Andhra Bank Housing Finance Ltd. (2003) 47 SCL 513: (2003) CLC 681 (AP) . . . . . 39-11 Andhra Pradesh Tourism Development Corpn. v Pampa Hotels Ltd. 2010 (5) SCC 425; [2010] 160 Comp Cas 1 (SC).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29-7, 29-9 Andrews v Gas Metor Co [1897] 1 Ch 361.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-9 Aneeta Hada v Godfather Travels and Tours P. Ltd [2012] 172 Comp Cas 75 (SC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-19, 35-106, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-200 Angile Insulations vs. Davy Ashmore India Ltd (1995) 4 SCC 153 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68-8 Anglo-French Exploration Co. (1902) 2 Ch 842 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-38 Angostura Bitters Ltd. v Albert Kerr AIR 1934 PC 89: (1934) 4 Comp Cas 1: (1933) AC 550 (PC): 148 IC 654 (PC): 6 RPC 131: 65 MLJ 785.. . . 11-10, 11-23 Anil Gupta v. Star India P. Ltd. [2014] 185 Comp Cas 251 (SC). . . . . . . . . . . 35-107, 35-200 Anil Handa v Indian Acrylic Ltd (2000) 99 Comp Cas 36 (SC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-10, 35-105, 35-106, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-192, 35-198, 35-199, 35-200, lxxiii
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Anil Kumar Poddar v Future Commercials P. Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28-4, 28-10 Anita Chadha v Registrar of Companies (1999) 96 Comp Cas 265 (Del). . . . . . . . . . . 35-17 Anita Grover v Commissioner of Central Excise [2013] 22 GSTR 264 (Delhi). . . . . 43-154 Anita Malhotra v Apparel Export Promotion Council (2011) 168 Comp Cas 240 (SC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-146, 43-44 Annamalai Chettiar (VEA) v Veerappa Chettiar (SVVS) AIR 1956 SC 12.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24-7, 44-46, 50-32 Anokh Singh v Punjab State Election Commission 2010 AIR SCW 6649: (2010) 7 SCC 425. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38-7 Ansal Properties & Industries Ltd. v. State of Haryana [2009] 3 SCC 553:2009 AIR SCW 2041. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-42, 45-4 Anthony v Wright [1995] BCC 768. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-23 Antigen Laboratories Ltd., In re (1951) 1 All ER 110 (Ch D). . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-23, 55-117 Aparna A Shah v Sheth Developers Pvt Ltd 2013 AIR SCW 4161. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-79 Apthorpe v Peter Schoenhofen Brewing Co (1899) 4 TC 41. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-8, 2-20 Arjan Singh v. State of Punjab AIR 1970 SC 703 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-11 Arjun Prasad AIR 1962 SC 1192 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-12, 35-38 ARTA v. WH Smith & Sons Ltd. (1969) 3 All ER 1065 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47-8 Arthanari Transports (P) Ltd. v Swami Goundar (KP) (1965) 35 Comp Cas 930 (Mad-DB): (1965) 2 Comp LJ 266. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-5 Asansol Electric Supply Co Ltd v Chunnilal Daw AIR 1972 Cal 19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-12 Ashbury Railway Carriage & Iron Co v Riche (1875) LR 7 HL 653.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-14, 11-10, 60-18, 43-202 Ashbury v Watson [1885] 30 Ch D 376 (CA).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-10 Ashish Das Gupta v Satvinder Singh [2000] 37 CLA 104 (CLB).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-48 Ashok Chaturvedi v Shitul H. Chanchani (1998) 94 Comp Cas 401 (SC).. . . . . . . . . 14-101 Ashok Kumar Das v University of Burdwan (2010) 23 SCC 616. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-241 Ashok Kumar Oswal v. S. P. Oswal [2000] 110 Comp Cas 747 (CLB). . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-73 Ashok Kumar v. State of Bihar [2007] 78 SCL 355 (Pat) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-162 Ashok Transport Agency v Awadhesh Kumar (1998) 5 SCC 567. . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-25, 27-12 Ashol Kumar v. State of Bihar and Others [2008] 141 Comp Cas 425 (Patna). . . . . . 43-152 Asrafkhan v State of Gujrat 2012 AIR SCW 6069. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-242 Assistant Commissioner v Velliappa Textiles Ltd. (2003) 11 SCC 405. . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-93 Assistant Registrar v Kothari (H C) (1992) 75 Comp Cas 688 (Mad): (1993) 10 CLA 80 (Mad).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25-8 Associated Artists Ltd. v. I.R.C. [1956] 2 All E.R. 583. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-14 Associated Color Laboratories Ltd., Re, (1970) 12 DLR 338 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-28 Associated Hotels of India Ltd. v. R. N. Kapoor AIR 1959 SC 1262. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-37 Association of Unified Tele Services Providers v Union of India 2014 AIR SCW 2400. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-22 lxxiv
Table of cases
Astley v New Tivoli Limited (1898) 1 Ch 151 (Ch D). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38-10 Astra Zeneca Pharma India Ltd In re (2010) 97 SCL 51 (Kar) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19-10 Athlumney, Re, [1898] 2 Q. B. 551 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-13 Atlas Wright (Europe) Ltd v Wright [1999] BCC 163 (CA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-146 Atmaram Modi v Ecl Agrotech Ltd. [1999] 4 Comp LJ 379, [1999] 98 Comp Cas 463 (CLB), [1999] 35 CLA 14; [1999] 22 SCL 5(CLB).. . . . . . . . . . . . 55-75 AtmaramMohanlal Panchal v Gunavantiben [1978] 48 Comp Cas 250 Guj. . . . . . . . . 14-33 Attorney General of Belize v Belize Telecom Ltd [2009] Bus LR 1316 (PC). . . . . . . . 11-21 Attorney General of Tuvalu v Philatelic Distribution Corporation Ltd. 1990 BCC 30 . . . 43-146 Attorney General v Edison Telephone Co Ltd [1880] 6 QBD 244. . . . . . . . . . . . 63-4, 50-41, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63-9 Attorney General’s Reference (No 2 of 1 999) (2000) 3 All ER 182 (CA) . . . . . 35-85, 35-93 Atul Drug House Ltd., In re, [1971] 41 Comp Cas 352 (Guj). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-100 Aucllterarder of Presbytery v Lord Kinnou/l 6 Cl & F 646, 686. . . . . . . 18-5, 21-58, 31-73, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-18, 43-61 Aung Ban Zeya v. CRMA Chettier Firm, AIR 1929 Rangoon 288 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57-8 Australian Securities Commission v AS Nominees Ltd (1995) 133 ALR 1.. . . . 44-14, 44-64 Automatic Self-Cleansing Filter Syndicate Co Ltd v Cuninghame [1906] 2 Ch 34 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-58, 9-61 Aveline Scott Ditcham v James J. Miller (1932) 2 Comp Cas 14 (PC): AIR 1931 PC 203.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29-5 Aveling Barford Ltd v Perion Ltd (1989) BCLC 626, 631. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-18, 3-20, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-61, 14-70 B Johnson & Co.’s case [1955] 2 All ER 775:(1955) 25 Comp Cas 317 (CA) . . . . . . . 47-12 B K Holdings P. Ltd. v. Prem Chand Jute Mills Ltd. [1983] 53 Comp Cas 367 (Cal). . . 4-43 B N Viswanathan v Tiffins Barytes Asbestos & Paints Ltd (1952) 23 Comp Cas 29 (Mad):AIR 1953 Mad 520. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45-6, 49-23 B. Johnson & Co. (Builders) Ltd., Re, [1955] 2 All ER. 775:[1955] 25 Comp Cas 317 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47-7 B.K. Garad V. Nasik Merchants Co-op. Bank Ltd. (1984) 2 SCC 50;AIR 1984 SC 192. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-66 Babulal Choukhani v Western India theatres Ltd. [1958] 28 Comp Cas 565. . . . . . . . . . 21-7 Babulal M Varma v New Standard Coal Co. Pvt Ltd. (1967) 1 Comp LJ 161 (Cal). . . 21-50 Babulal Nagar v Shree Synthetics Ltd AIR 1984 SC 1164. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-21 Bacha F. Guzdar v CIT (1955) 25 Comp Cas 1 (SC): AIR 1955 SC 74: (1955) 27 ITR 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-20, 3-16, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22-5, 35-33 Badgerhill Properties Ltd. v. Cottrell; and Cotrell v Badgerhill Properties Ltd. (1991) BCLC 805 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-163 lxxv
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Badrinath Shankar Bhandari v Omprakash Shankar Bhandari 2014 (5) ABR 791. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-59, 51-18, 61-18 Bahia and San Francisco Railway Co., Re, (1868) LR 3 QB 584 . . . . . . . . . . . 14-100, 21-42 Bailey, Hay & Co. Ltd., Re, [1971] 3 All ER 693, [1971] 1 WLR 1357 . 35-243, 50-141, 50-145 Baillie v Oriental Telegraph & Electric Co. (1915) 1 Ch. 503. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34-14, 50-87 Bajaj Electrical Ltd. v Metals & Allied Products, AIR 1988 Bom 167 . . . . . . . . . 12-7, 12-15 Bakhshish Singh v Khalsa Bank Ltd. AIR 1933 Lah 1016.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-13 Balaghat Gold Mining Co Ltd, Re, (1901) 2 KB 665 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28-7 Balasundaram (VG) v New Theatres Carnatic Talkies (P) Ltd (1993) 77 Comp Cas 324 (Mad): 1995 (3) Comp LJ 231: 1993 (11) CLA 213. . . . 11-24 Balasundaram (VG) v New Theatres Carnatic Talkies Pvt Ltd (1995) 3 Comp LJ 231 (Mad): (1993) 11 CLA 212 (Mad): (1993) 77 Comp Cas 324 (Mad). . . 64-20 Baldev Krishna Sahi v Shipping Corporation of India Ltd. AIR 1987 SC 2245 . . . . . 35-237 Baldevdas R. Raheja and others v. The Union of India and others (Miscellaneous Petition No.683 of 1973). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56-6 Balkrishan Gupta v Swadeshi Polytex Ltd (1985) 58 Comp Cas 563: AIR 1985 SC 520: (1985) 2 SCC 167: (1985) 2 SCR 854: (1985) 2 Comp LJ 1 (SC) 1-12, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-45, 9-46, 14-130, 21-39, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-66, 21-68, 55-4, 55-7, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-137, 55-139, 55-142 Balmenach-Glenliver Distillery Ltd 1916 SC 639. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40-10 Balmokand v Indian Merchants Bank Ltd (1928) 110 IC 421. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-20 Balwant Rai Saluja v Air India Ltd AIR 2015 SC (Civil) 109. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-26 Balwant Rai Saluja v Air India Ltd AIR 2015 SC 375. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-21 Balwant Singh Sethi v Sardar Z H Singh (1988) 63 Comp Cas 310 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-112, 50-113, 53-7, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53-22, 62-11, 62-12, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-11, 65-13, Bamford v Bamford (1970) Ch 212: (1969) 39 Comp Cas 339. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-60 Bamford v Bamford [1968] 2 All ER 655, [1968] 3 WLR 317, [1968] 2 Comp LJ 270, [1969] 39 Comp Cas 369.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60-21 Bamford v Bamford [1969] 1 All ER 969 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60-19, 43-203 Bank of Baroda v Official Liquidator (1992) 73 Comp Cas 688 (MP) . . . . . . 35-109, 43-169 Bank of Hindustan, China And Japan, Re, ex-parte (1869) LR 5 Ch App 95. . . . . 14-100, 21-42 Bank of India Ltd. v Ahmedabad Manufacturing & Calico Printing Co. Ltd. [1972] 42 Comp Cas 211. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-30, 39-40 Bank of India Ltd. v. Ahmedabad Manufacturing & Calico Co. Ltd., Company Petition No.61 of 1971, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-41
lxxvi
Table of cases
Bank of Madura Shareholders Welfare Association v Governor, Reserve Bank of India [2000] 3 Comp LJ 212 (Mad) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52-10 Bank of Maharashtra Ltd. v Official Liquidator (1973) 43 Comp. Cas. 505 (Mysore) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57-20, 57-25, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-7, 64-12, Bank of Maharashtra v Racmann Auto Pvt. Ltd. (1992) 74 Comp Cas 752, 755 (Del). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-109, 43-168 Bank of Oudh v Nawab Ali Khan AIR 1926 Oudh 153. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-14 Bank of Syria, Re, (1900) 2 Ch 272 (Ch D). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-122, 50-5 Barclays Bank plc v British & Commonwealth Holdings plc [1996] 1 BCLC 1 (Ch D).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-18 Barett v Duckett [1995] 1 BCLC 243 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34-26 Barium Chemicals Ltd v Company Law Board AIR 1967 SC 295 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-14 Barium Chemicals Ltd. v. Company Law Board [1966] 36 Comp Cas 639 . . . . . . 56-6, 56-8 Barker v Wilson [1980] 2 All ER 82. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63-9 Barned’s Banking Co, Re, (1867) LR 2 Ch App 674. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-3 Baroda Borough Municipality v Workmen AIR 1957 SC 110. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-132 Barrett v Duckett [1995] 1 BCLC 243 (CA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34-27, 34-28 Barron v Potter (1914) 1 Ch 895. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-63, 49-19 Barrow Borough Transport Ltd, Re, (1989) 5 BCC 646. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57-5 Barry Artist Ltd, Re, [1985] 1 WLR 1305; [1985] BCLC 283 (Ch D). . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-147 Barton Medical Association v Jones (supra).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-95 Barton v London and North Western Railway (1888) 38 Ch D 144.. . . . . . . . . 21-42, 14-100 Barton v North Staffordshire Railway Co (1888) 38 Ch D 458: (1886-90) All ER 288 (Ch-D). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-100, 21-42, 14-117 Basant Lal v. Emperor AIR 1918 Lahore 170. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47-3, 47-6, 47-14 Batra (S. R.) v Taruna Batra AIR 2007 SC 1118: (2007) 3 SCC 169. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-25 Bausch & Lamb India Ltd. v Registrar of Companies (2000) 38 CLA 13 (Del).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-17 BDA Breweries & Distilleries Ltd v Cruickshank & Co Ltd (1997) 25 CLA 275 (Bom).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-22 BDA Ltd. v Kishore Rajaram Chhabria [1999] 2 Comp LJ 321: (2000) 36 CLA 193 (CLB). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-64 Becke v Smith (1836) 2 M & W 191. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-19 Beejay Engineers Pvt. Ltd. (1982) 1 Comp LJ 87 (Del) : (1983) 53 Comp. Cas. 918 (Del). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-127, 35-143, 35-224 Beeton & Co In re (1913) 2 Ch 279. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-26, 46-24, 46-37, 46-50 Beharilal v Binod Mills Co Ltd (1987) 3 Comp LJ 246: (1988) 64 Comp. Cas 117 (MP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-237 Beid v Reid (1886), 31 Ch. D. 408. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-58, 51-16, 61-5 lxxvii
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Bell Houses Ltd. v.City Wall Properties Ltd. [1966] 2 Q.B. 656. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-14 Bell Resources Ltd. v Turnbridge Pty Ltd. (1988) 12 ACLR 429 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-52 Bellary Electric Supply Co v Kanniram AIR 1933 Mad 320: 64 MLJ 130. . . . . . . . . 14-121 Bellerby v Rowland & Marwood’s Steamship Co (1902) 2 Ch 14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-20 Belmont Finance Corporation Ltd. v. Williams Furniture Ltd. (1979) 1 All ER 118 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-163 Benaras Bank Ltd. v Bank of Bihar [1947] 17 Comp Cas 249 (All). . . . . . . . . . 57-25, 64-12 Benga Behera v Braja Kishore Nanda 2007 AIR SCW 3741. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-47 Bengal and Assam Investors v. J.K. Eastern Industries Ltd. AIR 1956 Cal 658. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-100, 50-131 Bengal Burma Steam Navigation Company Ltd. In re (1940) 10 Comp Cas 69 (Rangoon H C) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15-8, 15-17, 15-20 Bengal Immunity Co. Ltd. v. State of Bihar AIR 1955 SC 661.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-64 Bengal Luxmi Cotton Mills Ltd., In Re, (1965) 35 Comp Cas 187 (Cal) . . . . . . . . . . . 55-53 Bennet Coleman & Co v Union of India AIR 1973 SC 564. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-15 Bennet Coleman & Co. v Union of India (1977) 47 Comp Cas 92 (Bom).. . . . . . . . . . 55-28 Bentley Stevens v Jones (1974) 2 All ER 653 (Ch D). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-7, 43-15, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-193, 43-197, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-66, 60-8 Berg Sons & Co Ltd & Ors v Adams & Ors [1992] BCC 661(QBD) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-23 Berlei Hestia (NZ) Ltd v Fernyhough [1980] 2 NZLR 150.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-182 Betts & Co Ltd v Macnaghten (1910) 1 Ch 430. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-84, 50-87 Beven v Webb [1901] 2 Ch. 59. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-183 Bhagabati Prasad Tantia v Assistant Registrar of Companies (1983) 53 Comp Cas 56 (Cal). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-9 Bhagat Ram Sharma v Union of India 1988 (1) SCR 1034: AIR 1988 SC 740: 1988 Supp. SCC 30: 1987 (2) Scale 1097: 1987 (4) JT 476. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-15 Bhagawati Developers v Peerless General Finance & Investment Co Ltd 2005 AIR SCW 4067 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19-18, 32-11 Bhagchand Jain v Provident Fund Inspector (1999) 33 CLA 318 . . . . . 43-44, 43-53, 43-130 Bhagirath Chandra Das v Emperor [1947] 17 Comp Cas 93 (Cal) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-126 Bhagirath Kanoria v State of M P supra at page 1692.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-16 Bhagwandas Garg v. Canara Bank Ltd. [1981] 51 Comp Cas 38 (AP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-12 Bhagwanji Morarji Gokuldas v Allembic Chemical Works Co. Ltd AIR 1948 PC 100.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-26, 27-14 Bhagwati Developers P. Ltd. v Peerless General Finance Investment Co. Ltd. [2013] 179 Comp Cas 421 (SC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-45 Bhagwati Developers v Peerless General Finance and Investment Co Ltd 2005 AIR SCW 4067 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67-8
lxxviii
Table of cases
Bhajekar v Shinkar [1934] 4 Comp Cas 434 (Bom), AIR 1934 Bom 243. . . . . 60-20, 43-204 Bhankerpur Simbhaoli Beverages Pvt Ltd v Sarabhjit Singh (1996) 86 Comp Cas 842 (P&H).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-48, 64-22 Bharamgouda Adgouda Patil v Sanjay Founders Pvt Ltd [2009] 92 CLA 165]; [2010] 158 Comp Cas 0594. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-46 Bharamgouda Adgouda Patil v Sanjay Foundries P. Ltd [2015] 193 Comp Cas 75 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-15, 55-131 Bharat Kumar Dilwali v Bharat Carbon & Ribbon Mfg Co Ltd (1973) 43 Comp Cas 197 (Del). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-113, 53-22, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62-12, 65-12 Bharat Steel Tubes Ltd v IFCI Ltd 2011 AIR SCW 2273. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-11 Bhatia (SC) v Wadhawa (PC) (1998) 92 Comp Cas 511 (P&H): (1998) 30 CLA 135 (P&H). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-56 Bhavani Shanker Joshi v Gordhandas Jamnadas AIR (30) 1943 PC 66. . . . . . . . 43-193, 60-6 Bhavnagar District Co-operative Bank Ltd. V. M.M. Joshi, Registrar Co-operative Societies [1987] 61 Comp Cas 318 (Guj). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-18 Bhim Sain v Government of NCT of Delhi 2014 Lab IC 2067. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-21 Bhim Singh v. Kan Singh AIR 1980 SC 727 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-42 Bhimbhai v Ishwardas Jugjiwandas (1893)ILR 18 Bom 152. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-72 Bhola Ram & Sons Ltd v The Crown (1934) 4 Comp Cas 159 (Lah): AIR 1934 Lah 530 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-20 Bhramar Lal Baxi v. Promode Ranjan Chaudhury AIR 1963 Assam 56 . . . . . . . . . . . . 57-16 Bhushan Kumar v State of NCT 2012 AIR SCW 2476. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-12 Bhuwalka Steel Industries Ltd v Bombay Iron and Steel Ltd (2010) 2 SCC 273. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67-4 Bibi Salma Khatoon v State of Bihar, 2001 AIR SCW 3346; (2001) 7 SCC 197. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-26 Biggerstaff v Rowatt’s Wharf Ltd. (1896) 2 Ch 93 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-51, 43-89, 59-4 Bihar State Financial Corporation v CIT [1976] 46 Comp Cas 155 (Pat). . . . . . . . . . . 14-65 Bihari Mills Ltd, In re (1985) 58 Comp Cas 6 (Guj) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-46 Bimal Singh Kothari v Muir Mills Co. Ltd. (1952) 22 Comp. Cas. 248 . . . . . . . . 11-15, 66-7 Bimla Devi v Devinder Singh AIR 2015 P&H 74. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-17 Birla Global Finance Ltd, Re, [2005] 126 Comp Cas 647 (Bom).. . . . . . . . . . . . . 15-24, 36-7 Bisbanath Prasad Khaitan v New Central Jute Mills Co Ltd [1961] 31 Comp Cas 125 (Cal).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-12 Bishopsgate Investment Management Ltd. v Maxwell (1993) BCC 120. . . . . . . . . . . . 49-15 Biswa Nath Kaithan v New Central Jute Mills Ltd, (1961) 31 Comp Cas 125 (Cal). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-37, 26-41 Biswanath Prasad Khaitan v New Central Jute Mills Co. Ltd. (1961) 31 Comp Cas 125 (Cal).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-12 lxxix
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Black Diamond Beverages v. Commercial Tax Officer AIR 1197 SC 3550. . . . . . . . . . 31-62 Bloom Dekor Ltd. v Subhash Himmatlal Desai (1994) 15 CLA 275 (SC): (1995) 82 Comp Cas 591 (SC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-67 BML Group Ltd, Re, (1994) BCC 502. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-52 Board of Muslim Wakfs, Rajasthan v Radha Kishan AIR 1979 SC 289: 1979 (2) SCC 468: 1979 (2) SCR 148: 1978 WLN 358. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-47 BOC India Ltd v Zinc Products & Co Pvt Ltd [1996] 86 Comp Cas 358 (Pat). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-34, 43-186 Bognor Regis UDC v Campion [1972] 2 All ER 61, [1972] 2 QB 169. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-11 Bolton v Lambert [1889] 41 Ch D 295. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60-9, 43-197, 48-19, 48-47 Bombay Burmah Trading Corp Ltd v DC Shroff (1886) ILR 10 Bom 415.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-4, 11-7, 11-18, 11-32 Bombay Gas Co Pvt Ltd v Regional Director, Western Region reported in (1996) 21 CLA 269 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-9, 39-34 Bond v Barrow Haematite Steel Co [1902] 1 Ch 353 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-12 Bond v Barrow Haematite Steel Co [1902] 1 Ch 362 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-53, 26-66 Bonelli’s Telegraph Co, Collies Claim, Re, (1871) LR 12 Eq 246. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-140 Booth v New Africander Co (1903) 1 Ch 295 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-178 Borland’s Trustee v Steel Bros & Co (1901) 1 Ch 279. . . . . . . . . 11-7, 11-18, 14-1052, 1-26 Boschoek Proprietary Co Ltd v Fuke (1906) 1 Ch 148 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-39, 43-94 Boston Deep Sea Fishing Co v Ansell (1881) 39 Ch D 339: (1958) 2 All ER 194. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-5 Boswell Wilkie Circus (Pty) Ltd. v Brian Boswell Circus (Pty) Ltd., (1985) Fleet Street Reports 443 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-7, 12-16 Boulting v Association of Cinematograph, Television & Allied Technicians (1963) 2 WLR 529: (1963) 33 Comp Cas 475 (CA), per Upjohn LJ.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-23 Bowman v Secular Society Ltd. (1917) AC 406 (HL).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-5 Bradford Investments plc, Re, (1991) BCLC 224: (1990) BCC 740.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-56, 26-68, 51-13, 51-14 Brahmaputra Tea Co. Ltd. v. Scarth, ILR (XI) Cal 545 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69-6 Braithwaite & Co. (India) Ltd. v Employees State Insurance Corporation AIR 1968 SC 413: 1968 (1) SCWR 379: 1968 (1) SCR 771. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-5 Bray v Ford 1968 AC 44. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-20 Breckland Group Holdings Ltd v London & Suffolk Properties Ltd (1989) BCLC 100:(1988) 4 BCC 542. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-63, 43-196, 44-30 Bridges & Salmon Ltd. v. The Swan (Owners), 1968 1 Lloyds Rep 5. . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-164 Bridgewater Navigation Co. (1891) 2 Ch 317 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-64 Brij Kishore Ram Sarup v Sheo Charan Lal (1938) All 100 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-25, 27-13 lxxx
Table of cases
British America Nickel Corporation v O’Brien [1927] AC 373; Goodfellow v Nelson Line [1912] 2 Ch 324.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-20 British American Tobacco Company v Inland Revenue Commissioners (1943) 1 All ER 13 (HL): (1943) AC 235 CA: (1943) 13 Comp Cas 123 (HL).. . . 50-14 British and American Trustee and Finance Corporation v Couper 1894 AC 399. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15-4, 15-6, 15-18 British and Foreign, etc., Co. v. Ashbury Carriage, etc., Co. (1869) 20 L.T. 360 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-14 British Asbestos Co Ltd v Boyd (1903) 2 Ch 439; (1900-3) All ER Rep 323.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-94 British Empire Match Co Ltd, Re, (1888) 59 LT 291.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-119, 43-121 British Equitable Insurance Co Ltd v Bailey (1906) AC 35. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53-18 British India Corporation Ltd. v Robert Menzies (1936) 6 Comp Cas 250 (All): AIR 1936 All 568. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28-7 British India Steam Navigation Co Ltd v Jasjit Sing AIR 1964 SC 1451 . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-14 British India Steam Navigation Co v Commissioners of Inland Revenue (1881) 7 QBD 165 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23-7 British Provident Life and Fire Insurance Society, Re, (1863) 1 De G J & S 504 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-20 British Seamless Paper Box Co. , Re, (1881) 17 Ch D 467. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-144 British Thomson Houston Co Ltd v Sterling Accessories Ltd (1924) 41 RPC 311. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-52 British Thomson-Houston Co. v. Federated European Bank, Ltd [1933] 3 Comp Cas 106 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-53, 43-90, 59-6 British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection (1995) 2 BCLC 1 . . . . . . . . . . . 50-91, 50-111 Briton Medical Association, Re, (1888) 39 Ch D 61. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-13 Brojo Lal Saha Banikya v Budh Nath Pyari Lal Das AIR 1928 Cal 148. . . . . . . . 9-25, 27-11 Brook Bond India Ltd., v U B Ltd. (1994) 13 CLA 391: (1994) 79 Comp. Cas. 346 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-134 Brooke Bond India Ltd. v. U B Ltd. [1994] 79 Comp Cas 379 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-44 Browline v G H Marshall Ltd [2002] 2 BCLC 655 (Ch D).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-104 Browne v Black [1912] 1 KB 316 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-22, 65-27 Browne v La Trinidad [1887] 37 Ch 1 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-5, 50-63 BSB Holdings Ltd (No. 2), Re, (1996) 1 BCLC 155 (Ch D). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-16 BSN (UK) Ltd v Janardan Mohandas Rajan Pillai (1994) 13 CLA 138: (1996) 86 Comp Cas 371 (Bom).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-16, 34-8, 34-20, 49-79 Buenos Ayres Great Southern Railway Co Ltd, v Preston [1947] 1 All ER 729:[1948] 18 Comp Cas 65 (Ch) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-51, 26-53, 26-55, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-63, 26-65, 26-66, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-67, 51-12 lxxxi
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Bung v London Life Association Ltd. [Corporate Law Adviser, July 1989, Section III, p.16]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-58, 50-74 Burgoine v London Borough of Waltham Forest (1997) BCC 347.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-152 Burland v Earle (1902) AC 83.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34-13, 34-19, 34-25, 49-78 Burn v London and South Wales Coal Co and Risca Investment Co (1890) 7 TLR 118. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-175 Burrns v Siemens Bros Dynamo Works Ltd [1918] 1 Ch 225. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-3 Burry & Knight Ltd v Knight [2014] 1 WLR 4046; [2014] BCC 393. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28-9 Burt v British Nation Life Assurance Association (1859) 45 ER 62.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-21 Bushell v Faith (1969) 1 All ER 1002: (1969) 2 Comp LJ 139: (1969) 39 Comp Cas 848 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-165, 51-41, 53-16 Bushell v Faith (1970) AC 1099 (HL): (1970) 40 Comp Cas 944: (1970) 2 WLR 272: (1970) 1 All ER 53. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-29, 14-12, 14-136, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-164, 51-41, 53-15 Byng v London Life Associaiton Ltd. [1989] 1 All ER 560: [1989] 5 BCC 227 [1990] 3 Comp LJ 116: (1989) 2 CLA 16 (CA).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-88, 50-40, 50-43, 50-73, 63-12 C. B. Bhandari v Prvident Fund Inspector, Bangalore (1988) 63 Comp Cas 437 (Kar).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-17 C. C. Alavi Haji v Palapetty Muhammad (2007) 6 SCC 555. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66-10 C. Evans & Sons Ltd v Spritebrand Ltd [1985] 2 All ER 415. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-52, 35-55 C. K. Prahalada v State of Karnataka 2008 AIR SCW 4161 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-41 C.D.S. Financial Services (Mauritious) Ltd. v BPL Communications Ltd (2004) 56 SCL 665 (Bom): (2004) 121 Comp Cas 374 (Bom): (2004) 62 CLA 46 (Bom).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-132, 14-134 C.I.T. v M. Ramaswamy, (1985) 57 Comp Cas 7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-28 C.L. Nye Ltd. In re. [1970] 3 WLR 158:[19871] 41 Comp Cas 96 (CA). . . . . . 57-23, 64-10 C.W. Dixon Ltd, In re (147) 17 Comp. Cas. 191 (CD). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-50 CA Pacific Finance Ltd, Re, [2000] 1 BCLC 494 (HK CFI). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-105 CAGIT v Plantation Corpn. of Kerala Ltd. 2000 AIR SCW 4463: AIR 2000 SC 3714: (2001) 247 ITR 155 (SC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25-5 Calcutta Chromotype Ltd v Collector of Central Excise 1998 (99) ELT 202:1998 AIR SCW 1379. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-22 Calcutta Gas Co. v. State of West Bengal AIR 1962 SC 1044. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25-11 Calcutta Landing and Shipping Co. Ltd. v. Collector of Calcutta & Others AIR 1982 (cal) 209. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-15 Calgary & Edmonton Land Co Ltd. (1975) WLR 355. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40-10 Calico Printer’s Association Ltd v A A Karim & Bros. [1931] 1 Comp Cas 58 (Bom):AIR 1930 Bom 566. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-31 Caminetti v. U.S., 242 U.S. 470 (1917) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-78 lxxxii
Table of cases
Candler case [1951] 2 KB 164 at p. 183. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-20 Candler v Crane, Christmas & Co [1951] 2 KS 164 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-19, 33-20 Cane v Jones [1980] 1 WLR 1451 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-145 Cannanore Whole Body C. T. Scan & Research Centre P Ltd. (1998) 29 CLA 446. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-117 Caparo Industries Plc v Dickman [1990] 2 AC 603;[1990] 2 WLR 358; [1990] 1 All ER 568;[1990] BCLC 273 (HL). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-15, 33-18 Caratal (New) Mines Ltd, Re, (I902) 2 Ch 498 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-18 Carr v Inland Revenue Commissioners (1944) 2 All ER 163.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-19, 30-32 Carron Tea Co. Ltd. [1996] II Comp. LJ 278. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-40 Cartwright v MacCormack (Trafalgar Insurance Co Ltd Third Parties) [1963] 1 All ER 11 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62-9, 65-10, 65-21 Cassidy v Ministry of Health (1951) 2 KB 343. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-32 Castiglione’s Will Trusts, Hunter v Mackenzie (1958) 28 Comp Cas 365 (Ch D). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-22 Castrol India Ltd v State of Tamil Nadu (1999) 114 STC 468 (Mad),. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42-7 Catherine Lee v Lee’s Air Farming Ltd. (1961) AC 12 (PC).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-31 Cawley & Co, Re, (1889) 42 Ch D 209. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-208, 43-126, 44-27 CCE v Detergents India Ltd 2015 AIR SCW 3304.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-28 CDS Financial Services (Mauritius) Ltd v BPL Communications Ltd [2004] 121 Comp Cas 374 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-27 Central Bank of India & Ors. v. Their Workmen AIR 1960 SC 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-10 Central Bureau of Investigation v. Duncans Agro Industries Ltd., Calcutta (1996) 5 SCC 591. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-66, 14-187 Central Excise, Vadodara v. Dhiren Chemical Industries AIR 2002 SC 453. . . . . . . . . . 67-9 Central Manbhum Coal Co. Pvt Ltd. v Assistant Registrar (1986) 59 Comp Cas 176 (Cal). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-17 Centron Industrial Alliance Ltd. v Pravin Kantilal Vakil [1985] 57 Comp Cas 12 (Bom).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-65 Century Flour Mills Ltd v S Suppiah [1975] 45 Comp Cas 444 (Mad-FB). . . . . . . . . . 50-63 Chambers v Smith (1843) 12 M&W 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53-5, 62-11, 65-12 Chamundeeswari v Commercial Tax Officer, Vellore Rural [2007] 78 SCL 151 (Mad). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-1624 Chandavarkar Sita Ratna Rao v Ashalata S. Guram (1986) 4 SCC 447; AIR 1987 SC 117. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-22 Chandbali Steamer Service Co. Ltd., In re (1956) 26 Comp. Cas. 109. . . . . . . . . . . . . 57-14 Chander Mohan Jain v CRM Digital Synergies P Ltd (2008) 3 Comp LJ 125 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-40 Chandrakant Khaire v Shantaram Kale (1988) 4 SCC 577: [1989] 1 CLA 142 (SC):AIR 1988 SC 1665. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-50, 50-57, 50-70, 50-73 lxxxiii
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Channel Collieries Trust Ltd. v Dover, etc. Railway Co (1914) 2 Ch 506 (CA).. . . . . . 43-94 Charanjit Lal Chowdhury v. Union of Indi AIR 1951 SC 41; [1951] 21 Comp Cas 33 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-26 Charanjit Singh Chadha v. Sudhir Mehra AIR 2001 SC 3721. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-80 Charles Joseph v Kyauktaga Grant Co Ltd (1935) 5 Comp Cas 265 (Rang): AIR 1935 Rang 76. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-95 Charterhouse Investment Trust Ltd v Tempest Diesels Ltd (1985) 1 BCC 99,544 . . . 43-140 Cherry & McDougall v. Colonial Bank of Australasia (1869) LR 3 PC 24. . . . . . . . . 43-165 Cheshire Banking Co, Duff’s Executors’ case, Re, (1885) 32 Ch D 301. . . . . . . . . . . . 14-68 Chidambaram Pillai’s case (1977) 106 ITR 292 (SC).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-31 Chief Controlling Revenue Authority v Satyawati Sood AIR 1972 Delhi 171 . . . . . . 14-107 Chief Forest Conservator (Wildlife) v Nisar Khan AIR 2003 SC 1897. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67-3 Chintalapati Srinivas Raju v Securities and Exchange Board of India AIR 2018 SC 2411 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-169, 35-179 Chiranjilal Chaudhari v Union of India (1951) 21 Comp Cas 33 (SC): AIR 1951 SC 41: 1950 SCR 869. . . 1-20, 3-16, 22-5, 35-33 Chloro Controls (India) P. Ltd. v Severn Trent Water Purification Inc. (2006) 131 Comp Cas 501 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-16 Chokkalingam Chettiar v Official Liquidator (1943) 13 Comp Cas 263 (Mad). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-66, 43-44, 43-54, 43-44, 43-130 Choppington Collieries v Johnson (1944) 1 All ER 762 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-84 Chotanagpur Banking Association Ltd v R N Mukherji (1947) 17 Comp Cas 17 (Pat). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-22 Chotoo Sud v Bhagwan Finance Corpn (P) Ltd (2006) 130 Comp Cas 567 (CLB).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-44, 64-14 Christopher Barker & Sons v Inland Revenue Commissioners (1919) 2 KB 222. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-19, 30-34 Chunilal Khusaldas Patel v Adhyaru (H K) (1956) 26 Comp Cas 168 (SC).. . . . . . . . . 21-70 CIT (Addl.) v Om Oils & Oil Seeds Exchange Limited (1985) 152 ITR 552 (Del) (DB): (1985) 51 Comp Cas 592. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-75, 37-5 CIT, Bengal v. Mercantile Bank of India L.R. (1936) A.C. 478 : L.R. 63 I.A. 457 : 71 M.L.J. 525 (P.C.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19-8 CIT, Lucknow v Bazpur Co-operative Sugar Factory Ltd. AIR 1989 SC 1866: (1989) Supp 2 SCC 240.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-34 CIT Andhra Pradesh v C. P. Sarathy Mudaliar 1972 SCR 1076. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-24 CIT v. Alagappa Textiles (Cochin) Ltd. [1979] 49 Comp Cas 947 (SC) . . . . . . . . . . . . 47-12 CIT v. Indra Industries [2001] 122 STC 100 (SC); AIR 2000 SC 3442; 2000 AIR SCW 2074 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67-7 CIT v. Maduri Rejeswar (1977) 107 ITR 832 (A. P.). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-247 CIT v. Shahzada Nand & Sons 1966 SC 1342. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25-11 lxxxiv
Table of cases
CIT v. Sri Meenakshi Mills Ltd., Madurai AIR 1967 SC 819 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-40 CIT v. Swastik Rubber Products Ltd. (1983) 140 ITR 304 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42-5 CIT v. The Century Spg. & Mfg. Co. Ltd., (1953) 23 Comp Cas. 462: AIR 1953 (SC 501). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32-3 CIT v. Western India Engg. Co. Ltd. (1970) 77 ITR 165 (Guj.). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-247 CIT v Alagappa Textiles (Cochin) Ltd. (1979) 49 Comp Cas 947 (SC). . . . . . . . . 47-5, 47-10 CIT v Ari Athi Ramachandra Chettiar [1964] 1 Comp LJ 173 (Madras). . . . . . . . . . . . . 19-9 CIT v Armstrong Smith (L) (1946) 16 Comp Cas 172 (Bom).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-25, 46-50 CIT v Associated Clothiers Ltd AIR 1963 Cal 629 . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-24, 2-6, 2-33, 2-48, 8-15 CIT v A W Figgis & Co. AIR 1953 SC 455. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-28, 27-14 CIT v Bombay Trust Corporation Ltd AIR 1930 PC 54. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-5 CIT v B P Dalmia (1994) 3 Comp LJ 268 (Cal). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-29 CIT v B P Dalmia (1994) 3 Comp LJ 271 (Cal). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-29 CIT v C. M. Kothari AIR 1964 SC 331 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-29 CIT v Central India Industries Ltd [1972] 82 ITR 555:AIR 1972 SC 397. . . . . . . . . . . . 3-25 CIT v City Mills Distributers Pvt Ltd 1996 AIR SCW 698. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-34 CIT v Durga Kumar Nanda (1995) 211 ITR 639 (Ori).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-31 CIT v Ekbal & Co. [1945] 13 ITR 154 (Bom); AIR 1945 Bom 316 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62-7 CIT v Express Newspapers Ltd. (1998) 3 SCC 106: (1998) 230 ITR 477 (SC): (1998) 3 Comp LJ 23 (SC): (1998) 28 CLA 328 (SC): (1998) 15 SCL 340 (SC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-7, 26-46 CIT v Indo Mercantile Bank Ltd. AIR 1959 SC 713.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-171 CIT v Keshwani (JG) (1993) 12 CLA 20 (Pat): (1993) 202 ITR 391 (Pat). . . . . . . . . . 46-30 CIT v Lady Navajbai R.J. Tata (1947) 17 Comp Cas 9 (Bom).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-25, 46-50 CIT v Nanavati (SK) (1993) 202 ITR 466 (Pat). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-30 CIT v Principal Officer C/o Arkay Wires (P) Ltd (2005) 58 SCL 97 (All): (2005) 127 Comp Cas 250 (All): (2005) 66 CLA 354 (All). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-39 CIT v Rajes (MSP) (1993) 77 Comp Cas 402 (Kar): (1993) 202 ITR 646 (Kar).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-21, 46-29, 46-52 CIT v Ramaswamy (M) (1985) 151 ITR 122: (1985) 57 Comp Cas 7 (Mad).. . . . . . . . 21-68 CIT v Ritu Kapoor (Smt) (1993) 202 ITR 847 (Ori) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-31 CIT v Sarabhai Sons Ltd. (1983) 1 Comp LJ 203 (Guj).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-20 CIT v Shanti Devi (Smt) (1993) 199 ITR 800 (Ori). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-30 CIT v Shantilal Vrajlal & Chandulal 1957 31 ITR 903 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-28 CIT v Sri Meenakshi Mills Ltd AIR 1967 SC 819: (1967) 63 ITR 609 (SC). . . . . . . 2-8, 2-20 CIT v Sriram Agarwal (1986) 161 ITR 302 (Pat). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67-6 CIT v Standard Vacuum Oil Co (1966) 1 Comp LJ 187 (SC).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37-6 CIT v The Century Spg. & Mfg. Co. Ltd. [1953] 23 Comp Cas 462:AIR 1953 SC 501). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19-11 lxxxv
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
CIT v Travancore Chemical Manufacturing Co. Ltd. (1982) 133 ITR 818 (Ker). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-27, 46-28 CIT v Vatika Township Pvt. Ltd. 2014 AIR SCW 5674. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-59, 51-18, 61-12 City Equitable Fire Insurance Co Ltd, Re, (1925) 1 Ch 407: (1924) All ER 485 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-5, 35-128, 35-130, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-132, 35-149, 43-197, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-19, 48-47, 60-9 City of Amarillo v York, 167 S.W.2d 787 (Texas). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62-8, 65-9 City, etc., Trust Corpn. Ltd. 1951 SC 570. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40-10 Clariant International Ltd v Securities and Exchange Board of India (2004) 8 SCC 524. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-20 Claridges Patent Asphalt Co Ltd In re (1921) 1 Ch 543. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-128 Claude-Lila Parulekar v. M/s. Sakal Papers Pvt. Ltd. AIR 2005 SC 4074; [2005] 124 Comp Cas 685 (SC).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60-4 Clayfield Holland Ltd. In re (1953) 55 Bom LR 768. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-119 Clemens v Clemens Bros Ltd and another [1976] 2 All ER 268 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-27 Clinch v. Financial Corporation (1868) L.R.5 Eq. 450, 481. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-82, 50-87 Clive Mills Co. Ltd., In re, (1964) 1 Comp LJ 301 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-100, 50-131 Clucoseries Pvt Ltd. v Deb Kanta Roy (2000) 38 CLA 39 (Cal). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-64 Coal Marketing Co of India P Ltd, Re, (1967) 37 Comp Cas 720 (Cal): (1967) 1 Comp LJ 237 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-117 Cobb v Becke [1845] 6 QB 930. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-15 Cockburn v Newbridge Sanitary Steam Laundry Co Ltd [1915] 1 Ch 237 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60-23, 43-207 Col. K.S. Dhillon v Paragaon Utility Financiers (P) Ltd (1988) 64 Comp Cas 19 (P&H) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-5 Col. Kuldip Singh Dhillon v. Paragon Utility Financiers (P) Ltd. [1986] 60 Comp Cas 1075 (P&H) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-13 Collector of Moradabad v Equity Insurance Co Ltd (1948) 18 Comp Cas 309 (Oudh). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-20, 64-5 Collins v Birmingham Breweries Ltd. (1899) 15 TLR 180 (CA).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-19 Colonial Sugar Refining Co Ltd v Irving 1905 AC 369. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-5 Commercial Plastics Ltd. v. Vincent 3 All ER 546. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69-6 Commercial Union Ins. Co. v. Alitalia Airlines, S.p.A., 347 F.3d 448, 462 (2d Cir. 2003). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-40, 8-6 Commissioner of Agricultural I.T., Kerala v Plantation Corpn. of Kerala Ltd. AIR 2000 SC 3714; 2000 AIR SCW 4463 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-20 Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax & Sales-tax v Vardhani Plantations P Ltd. (1993) 112 CTR 181 (Ker).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-31
lxxxvi
Table of cases
Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) v. Aafloat Textiles (I) P. Ltd. AIR 2009 SC (Supp) 2320. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-10 Commissioner of Customs v Indian Oil Corpn. Ltd. AIR 2004 SC 2799 . . . . . . . . . . . . 67-9 Commissioner of Sales Tax, M.P. v Radhakrishan.AIR 1979 SC 1588. . . . . . . . . . . . . 27-15 Commissioners of Inland Revenue v Maxse (1919) 1 KB 647: (1919) 12 Tax Cas. 41. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-20, 30-35 Compensation Scheme Ltd v West Bromwich Building Society [1998] 1 WLR 896, 912-913. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-21 Comptroller and Auditor-General of India v. Mohan Lal Mehrotra (1992) 1 SCC 20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67-5 Comtec Components Ltd, In re [2014] 186 Comp Cas 311 (Mad). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15-20 Consolidated Coffee Ltd. (1999) 97 Comp Cas 1 (Kar). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40-8 Consolidated Copper Mines Ltd, Re, (1889) 42 Ch D 160 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-4 Consolidated Pneumatic Tool Co. (I) Ltd v Additional Registrar of Companies (1989) 65 Comp Cas 259 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-17 Consumer Education and Research Centre v TTK Pharma Ltd. (1990) 68 Comp Cas 89 (MRTPC) (FB). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-126, 31-93 Conway and others v Petronius Clothing Co Ltd and others [1978] 1 All ER 185. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-175, 43-177 Cooke v Charles A. Vogeler Co. (1901 AC 102) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52-12 Co-operative company Ltd. v Commissioner of Trade Tax, U.P. (2007) 4 SCC 480. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-18 Copal Varnish Co Ltd, In re (1917) 2 Ch 349. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-93, 55-143 Corbett, Ex parte, (1980) 14 Ch D 122.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27-13 Corman-Collins SA v La Maison du Whisky SA (2014) 2 WLR 494 (ECJ).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-42 Coronation Tea Co. Ltd. (1962) 31 Comp Cas 568 (Cal). . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-4, 21-13, 21-15 Corporate Affairs Commission v David Jones Finance Ltd (1975) 2 NSWLR 710. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-179 Corporation of the City of Victoria v. Bishop of Vancouver Island AIR 1921PC 240. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-10 Cosmosteels P. Ltd. v Jairam [1978] 48 Comp Cas 312 (SC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-115 Costa Rica Rail Co v Forwood 1900 LRI Ch 756 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-20 Cotman v Broughman (1918) AC 514 (HL). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-5 Council for Indian School Certificate Examination v. Isha Mittal (2000) 7 SCC 521. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-88 Court of Appeals. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-23 Crawley and Co (1889) 42 Ch D 209. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-34 Cree v Somervail (1879) 4 App Cas 648 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-22 Crichton’s Oil Company, Re, [1902] 2 Ch 87. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-28 lxxxvii
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Crigglestone Coal Company, In re, (1906) 2 Ch D 327. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40-5 Crompton Greaves Ltd v Sky Cell Communication Ltd [2003] 115 Comp Cas 832 (Mad). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-36, 14-54 Cross v Imperial CG Assn. (1923) 2 Ch 553.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-64 CST v Purshottam Premji (1970) 2 SCC 287. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-31 Cull v. Inland Revenue Commissioners 1940 AC 51. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-36 Cumbrian Newspapers Group Limited v Cumberiand & Westmoriand Herald Newspaper & Printing Co. Ltd. (1986) 2 All ER 816: (1986) 2 BCC 99, 227 (CD).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-135, 14-145 Currie v Commissioners of Inland Revenue (1912) 2 KB 332.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-20, 30-35 Customs and Excise Commissioners v Hedon Alpha Ltd. [1981] 2 All ER 697. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-127 CVC/Opportunity Equity Partners Ltd v Demarco Almeida (2002) 2 BCLC 108: (2002) BCC 684 (PC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-106 D & L Caterers Ltd and Jackson v D’Ajou [1946] 16 Comp Cas 1 (CA) . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-14 D Arcy v Tamar, etc, Railway Co (1867) LR 2 Ex 158 . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-208, 43-135, 44-27 D R Chemicals Ltd, Re, (1989) 5 BCC 39 (Ch D). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17-7 D Srinivasaiah v Vellore Varulakshmi Bank Ltd. [1954] 24 Comp Cas 55. . . . . . . . . . . 13-8 D. N. Banerji v P. R. Mukhrejee AIR 1953 SC 58. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-132 D. Sanjeevayya v. Election Tribunal Andhra Pradesh AIR 1967 SC 1211. . . . . . . . . . . 43-63 D. Vinod Shivappa v. Nanda Belliapa [2006] 131 Comp Cas 663 (SC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63-3 Daewoo Motors India Ltd v H. D. Talawani [2012] 175 Comp Cas 530 (Delhi) . . . . . . . 35-147 Dafedar Niranjan Singh v Custodian, Evacuee Property AIR 1961 SC 1425: 1962 (1) SCR 214. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-17 Dahiben Umedhai Patel v. Narman James Hamilton [1985] 57 Comp Cas 700 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-42, 4-46, 6-9 Dalby v Bodilly [2005] BCC 627 (ChD). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-69 Dalco Engineering Pvt Ltd v Satish Prabhakar Padhey (2010) 4 SCC 378. . . . . . . . . . . 1-10 Dale & Carrington Investment (P.) Ltd. v Prathapan (P K) 2004 AIR SCW 5143: (2004) 122 Comp Cas 161 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-15 Dale and Carrington Invt. P. Ltd. and Another v P. K. Prathapan and Others (2004) 4 Comp LJ 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-96, 14-159, 55-68 Dale v IRC (1953) 2 All ER 671 (HL). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38-11 Dalmia (J.) v CIT (1964) 34 Comp Cas 668 (SC): (1964) 2 Comp LJ 69 (SC): (1964) 53 ITR 83 (SC): AIR 1964 SC 1866. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-5, 26-11 Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Ltd v. Union of India (1980) 50 Comp Cas 18. . . . . . . . . . . . 56-13 Dalton Time Lock Co v Dalton (1892) 66 LT 704 (CA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-127 Damodara Reddi v. Indian National Agencies Ltd. [1945] 15 Comp Cas 148. . . . . . . . 21-56 Daniels v Daniels (1978) Ch 406.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34-15 Danish Mercantile Co Ltd v Beaumont (1951) 1 All ER 925 (CA). . . . 43-192, 43-196, 60-8 lxxxviii
Table of cases
Darius Putton Kavasmaneck v Gharda Chemicals Ltd. and Others [2015] 188 Comp Cas 291 (SC); AIR 2015 SC (Supp) 1566. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-9 Darius Rutton Kavasmaneck v Gharda Chemicals Ltd [2015] 191 Comp Cas 52 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34-26, 61-19 Darius Rutton Kavasmaneck v Gharda Chemicals Ltd [2017] 204 Comp Cas 67 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-36 Dartmouth College v Woodward 17 U.S. (4 Wheat) 518. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-7 Daryodh Singh v. Union of India AIR 1973 Delhi 58 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-26 Dataware Design Labs (P) Ltd. v. State Bank of India [2005] 127 Comp Cas 176 (Ker) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-18 David Moseley and Sons Ltd., In re [1939] 9 Comp Cas 204 (Ch). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45-5 Davies v. Gas Light and Coke Company [1909] 1 Ch 708 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28-6 Davis & Collet Ltd, In re [1935] 5 Comp Cas 467 (Ch D).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-98 Dawson v African Consolidated Land & Trading Co (1898) 1 Ch 6 (CA).. . . . . . . . . . 43-93 DCIT v Sahara India Commercial Corporation Limited [2013] 28 ITR (Trib) 108 (Delhi). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23-6 Debi Jhora Tea Co Ltd v Barendra Krishna Bhowmick, (1980) 50 Comp Cas 771 (Cal).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-51 Deepa Rajkumar Singh v Deepak Kumar AIR 2005 Patna 71. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-5 Dehra Dun-Mussorie Electric Tramway Co Ltd v Jagmandar Das (1931) 1 Comp Cas 227 (All): AIR 1932 All 141. . . . . . . . . 43-94, 43-194, 60-14, 60-19 Delhi Cloth and General Mills Co Ltd v Union of India AIR 1983 SC 937;(1983) 54 Comp Cas 674 (SC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-15, 24-10 Delhi Development Authority v Skipper Construction Co. (P.) Ltd. (1997) 89 Comp Cas 362 (SC): (1996) 21 CLA 291 (SC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-17 Delhi Development Authority v. Punjab National Bank [1981] 19 DLT 353 (Delhi). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-83 Delhi State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd v J K Synthetics Ltd [2011] 163 Comp Cas 412 (Delhi). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-36 Delstar Commercial & Financial Ltd v V Sarvottam Vinjaya Ltd (2001) 2 CLC 1465: (2001) 43 CLA 46: (2003) 113 Comp Cas 642 (CLB).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-54 Delta International Limited v. Shyam Sundar Ganeriwalla AIR 1999 SC 2607 . . . . . . 44-48 Dena Bank v Bhikabhai Prabhudas Parekh & Co 2000 AIR SCW 4237. . . . . . . . . . . . 27-15 Dent’s case (1873) 8 Ch App 786, Lord Selborne.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-9 Deodutt Sharma v Zahoor Ahmed Zaid, AIR 1960 Raj. 25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-57, 50-71 Deorao Laxman Anande (Dr.) v Keshav Laxman Borkar AIR 1958 Bom 314, 316. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-51, 31-52, 38-5 Department of Health and Social Security v Evans 1984 BCLC 125 QBD (1985) 2 All ER 411. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-153 lxxxix
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v Portinex/Silindale/Dalvale [2000] NSWSC 99 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-21 Derbyshire County Council v Times Newspapers Ltd and others [1993] 1 All ER 1011 (HL). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-11 Descon Ltd. v Biman Behari Sen (No. 2) [2011] 162 Comp Cas 631 (Cal). . . . . . . . . . 50-60 Desh Bandhu Gupta v Delhi Stock Exchange Ltd (1979) 4 SCC 173. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67-6 Desiraju Venkatakrishna Sarma (1954) 5 STC 448 (AP): (1955) 25 Comp Cas 32.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-149, 43-161 Deuchar v. Gas Light and Coke Co. [1925] A.C. 691 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-14 Devarapalli Lakshminarayana Reddy v V. Narayana Reddy (1976) 3 SCC 252;AIR 1976 SC 1672. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-13 Development Co. of C. & W. Africa (1902) 1 Ch 547. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-38 Devi Ditta Mal v Standard Bank of India AIR 1927 Lah 799 . . . . . . . . . 9-46, 21-44, 55-139 Devi Talkies P Ltd v Parthasarathi Iyengar (VR) (1982) 52 Comp Cas 242 (Mad). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-87 Devis v Bank of England 130 ER 358 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-100, 21-42 Dewan Singh v Minerva Films Ltd. AIR 1959 Punjab 106: (1959) 29 Comp Cas 263 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-4, 21-55 Dharangadhara Chemical Words Ltd. v. State of Saurashtra, 1957 SCR 152 at p. 157 : (AIR 1957 SC 264). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-26 Dharma Pratishthan v. Miss B. Mandal, IAC (1988) 173 ITR 487/40 Taxman 358. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-6, 35-82, 35-94, 35-189 DHN Food Distributors Ltd. v London Borough of Tower Hamlets (1976) 3 All ER 462 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-11, 8-11 Dhrangadhra Chemical Works Ltd. v State of Saurashtra AIR 1957 SC 264.. . . . . . . . 46-29 Dileep Makhija (Dr) v Arun Mittal (2004) 118 Comp Cas 694 (Del): (2004) 59 CLA 177 (Del). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-23 Dimbula Valley (Ceylon) Tea Co. Ltd. v. Laurie, (1961) 1 All ER 769: (1961) 31 Compo Cas. 655. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19-18, 32-11, 32-12 Dinesh Vrajlal Lakhani v. Parke Davis (India) Ltd. [2005] 124 Comp Cas 728 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-36, 14-112, 14-113, Â . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20-10, 43-211 Dipak G. Mehta v Shree Anupar Chemicals (India) Pvt. Ltd. (1999) 2 CLJ 539, (1999) 33 CLA 393 (CLB); 1999 98 CompCas 575 CLB. . . . . 55-49 Director General of Investigation & Registration v Deepak Fertilizers & Petrochemicals Corpn Ltd (1994) 81 Comp Cas 341: (1994) 3 Comp LJ 600: (1994) 15 CLA 31: (1994) 1 SCL 239 (MRTPC) (FB) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-126, 31-93 Director of Enforcement v MCTM Corpn Pvt Ltd AIR 1996 SC 1100. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-8
xc
Table of cases
Director of Public Prosecutions v Kent and Sussex Contractors Ltd [1944] 1 All ER 119:(1944) 1 KBS 146: (1944) 14 Comp Cas 133 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-48, 35-91, 35-98, 35-121 Discoverrs Finance Corporation Ltd., Re, (1908) 1 Ch 141. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-100, 21-42 District Collector Vellore v K Govindraj AIR 2016 SC 526. . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-5, 61-7, 61-8 Dixon v Kennaway and Co (1900) 1 Ch D 833.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-100 DNick Holding plc, In re, [2013] 3 WLR 1316 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-52 Dodds v Walker [1980] 2 All ER 507; [1981] 1 WLR 1027 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-25 Dominion Tar and Chemical Co Ltd, Re, [1929] All ER Rep. 279 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-28 Doraiswami v United India Life Assurance Co AIR 1956 Mad 316.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-5 Dorchester Finance Co. Ltd. v Stebbing & Others [1989] BCLC 498 (Ch D). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-129, 35-130, 35-135 Dovey v John Cory (1901) AC 477 (HL). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-29, 35-66 Doypack Systems Pvt Ltd v Union of India AIR 1988 SC 782. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67-6 Dr Kamal Kumar Dutta v Ruby General Hospital Ltd [2000] 36 CLA 214:[2000] 2 Comp LJ 289 (CLB) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-4 Dr T N Raghunath v Lake Side Medical Centre P Ltd (2008) 4 Comp LJ 114 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-39, 55-68 Dr. A. Lakshmanaswami Mudaliar v. Life Insurance Corporation of India AIR 1963 SC 1185:[1963] 33 Com Cas 429 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-12, 10-21 Dr. Fredie Ardeshir Mehta v Union of India (1989) 2 CLA 244: (1991) 70 Comp Cas 210: (1991) 1 Comp LJ 437 (Bom) . . . . . . . . . . 23-8, 44-45, 50-30 Dr. Rajinder Singh v. State of Punjab (2001) 5 SCC 482. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67-5 Dr. Rajiv Das v United Press Ltd [2002] 108 Comp Cas 523 (CLB). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-32 Dr. S. Mangalam Ssinivasan v. Mani Forgings P. ltd. And Others. [2008] Comp cas 860 (CLB). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-5 Dr. Satya Charan Law v Rameshwar Prosad Bajoria (1950) 20 Comp Cas 39 (FC).34-18, 49-77 Dr. Vimla v. Delhi Administration [1963] 33 Comp Cas 279. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-10 Dronfield Silkstone Coal Co, In re, (1881) 17 Ch D 76. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-19 Drown v Gaumont British Picture Corporation Ltd (1937) Ch 402: (1938) 8 Comp Cas 136.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-63, 37-10 Duckett v Gover (1877) 6 Ch D 82.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34-24 Duff’s Settlement Trusts, Re, (1951) 1 All ER 869 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-76, 37-5 Dulichand Laxminarayan v CIT (1956) 29 ITR 535 (SC); AIR 1956 SC 354. . . . . . 9-27, 27-13 Dulichand Samsukh v Dunbar Mills Co AIR 1927 Cal 947. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-4 Duncan Gilmour & Co, Re, [1952] 2 All ER 871.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-9 Duomatic Ltd (1969) 1 All ER 161. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-83 Duomatic Ltd. , Re, [1969] 2 Ch 365: [1969] 2 WLR 114: (1969) 2 Comp LJ 81 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-140, 50-145
xci
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Durga Prasad Mandelia v Registrar of Companies (1987) 61 Comp Cas 479 (Bom): (1986) 1 Comp LJ 275 (Bom).. . . . 24-7, 44-45, 50-31 E W Savory Ltd, In re [1951] 2 All ER 1036. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-32 E. B. M. Co Ltd v Dominion Bank [1937] 7 Comp Cas 449 (PC) : AIR 1937 PC 279.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-20, 2-39, 8-5, 22-4, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-31, 43-157, 60-19, 43-202 E. Palanisamy v Palanisamy (2003) 1 SCC 123. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-88 E.B.M. Co. Ltd. v Dominion Bank (1937) 3 All ER 555. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-23 East & West Insurance Co Ltd v Kamla J Mehta (1956) 26 Comp Cas 313 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-208, 43-135, 44-27 East & West Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Mrs. Kamala Jayantilal Mehta AIR 1956 Bom 393. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-14 East India Produce Ltd. v. Naresh Acharya Bhaduri [1988] 64 Comp Cas 259 (Cal). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-44 Ebrahim Sait (H M)v Mettupalayam Narayani Bank Ltd (1940) 10 Comp Cas 300 (Mad). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-33 Ebrahimi v Westbourne Galleries Ltd and others (1972) 2 All ER 492: (1973) AC 360. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-12, 43-15, 55-10, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-15, 55-36, 55-91, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-94, 55-100, 55-109, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-114, 55-128, 55-130 Eckerle v Wickeder Westfalenstahl GmbH [2014] BCC 1 (Ch D). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-49 Economic Chit Funds Pvt. Limited v. P.S. Krishnoji Rao [1985] 58 Comp Cas 838 (Kar) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63-4 Economic Investment Corporation Ltd. v CIT [1970] 74 ITR 233 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13-8 ED Sasoon and Co v Patch (1922) 45 Bom LR 46. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-7, 51-25 Edward Feltham Coates and others v. The Sovereign Bank of Canada AIR 1914 PC 254. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60-22, 43-206 Edward Ganj Public Welfare Association Ltd. [1977] 47 Comp Cas 283 . . . . 50-103, 50-133 Egyptian Salt & Soda Co. Ltd. v Port Said Salt Association Ltd. (1931) 1 Comp Cas 285 (PC): AIR 1931 PC 182. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-15 Ehrmann Bros. Ltd., In re (1906) 2 Ch. 697. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57-10, 57-14 EIH Limited v Mashobra Resorts Ltd. (2004) 119 Comp Cas 993 (CLB): (2002) 4 Comp LJ 133 (CLB). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-35, 14-53 EIH Ltd v Mashobra Resorts Ltd [2003] 41 SCL 458. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-8 Eimco Elecon (India) Ltd v Mahanandi Coal Fields Ltd [2011] 167 Comp Cas 596 (Orissa) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-32 EIMCO KCP v ITC (2000) 2 SCC 729;[2000] 242 ITR 659. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-23 El Ajou v Dollar Land Holdings plc [1994] 2 All ER 685; [1994] BCC 143 (CA).. . . . 35-97
xcii
Table of cases
El Majboub v Cars on the Web.Deutschland GmbH [2015] 1 WLR 3986 (Court of Justice of the Europian Union) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63-11 EL Sombrero Ltd, Re, [1958] 28 Comp Cas 619. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-104, 50-134 Elder v Elder & Watson (1952) SC 49. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-13, 55-12, 55-16, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-18, 55-37, 55-39, 55-79, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-82, 55-109, 55-129 Electro Carbonium (P.) Ltd, In re [1979] 49Comp Cas 825 (Kar). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-43 Eley v Positive Government Security Life Assurance Co (1876) 1 Ex D 20, 23 LT 743 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-5, 14-136 Eley v Positive Government Security Life Assurance Co (1876) 24 WR 338 CA, 34 LT 190, 45 LJ QB 451. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-5 Elgindata Ltd., In re [1991] BCLC 959 (Ch D).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-134 Elkington & Co. v. Hurter, (1892) 2 Ch 452. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-164 Ellerman Lines Ltd v CIT (1971) 82 ITR 913 (SC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67-6 Elliot v Richardson [1870] 5 SCP 744. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-20, 31-17, 51-25 Emperor v. Benoari Lal Sarma AIR 1945 PC 48.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45-3, 50-152 Empire Mining Co In re (1890) 44 Ch D 402. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40-10, 41-7 Employees’ State Insurance Corp v Apex Engineering Pvt Ltd (1998) 28 CLA 26 (SC).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-35 Enercon Gmbh v Enercon (India) Ltd (2008) 143 Comp Cas 687 (CLB). . . . . . . . . . . . 58-7 Engineers Pvt Ltd v Munusamy (S) (2003) 116 Comp Cas 465 (Mad). . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-23 English v. Cliff (1914) 2 Ch 376. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-22 Enviroco Ltd v Farstad Supply A/S [2011] 1 WLR 921 (SC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-49, 9-51 Eric Holmes (property) Ltd. in re, [1965] 2 WLR 1260 : [1965] 35 Comp. Cas. 811 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57-23, 64-10 Erza v Secretary of State, ILR 32 C 605 (PC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57-27 Escorts Farms (Ramgarh) Ltd v CIT (1996) 222 ITR 509 (SC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19-9 Escorts Ltd v Sai Auto (1990) 4 CLA 285 (Del): (1992) 72 Comp Cas 483 (Del): (1990) 3 Comp LJ 195 (Del).. . . . . 1-37, 43-189, 64-17 ESI Corporation v Sarathi Lines Pvt Ltd. (1996) 26 CLA 67 (Ker). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-35 ESIC Medical Officers’ Association v ESIC AIR 2014 SC 1259. . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-22, 30-36 Essar Steel Ltd., In re (2006) 130 Comp Cas 123 (Guj): (2005) 59 SCL 457 (Guj).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-140 Esso Petroleum Co Ltd v Marden [1976] 2 All ER 5 (CA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-19 Estalissements Darty et fils, In re, 759 F.2d 15 (Fed.Cir.1985).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-22 Estate Building and Investment Co v Shepherd (1887) 36 Ch D 787 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-30 Estmanco (Kilner House) v GLC (1982) 1 WLR 2.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34-11 European Home Product Plc, Re, (1988) 4 BCC 779. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-85, 50-144 Evling v Israel and Oppenheimer Ltd (1918) 1 Ch 101. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-42 xciii
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Ewing v Buttercup Margarine Co. Ltd., (1917) 2 Ch 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-12 Exchange Bank Co, In re [1882] 21 Ch. D 519 (CA).. . . . . . . . . 3-19, 60-22, 35-66, 43-205 Exchange Banking Company Limited, In re, 21 Ch D 519.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-70 Executive Board of the Methodist Church of India v Union of India, (1985) 57 Comp. Cas. 443 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-10, 12-19 Executive Committee of Vaish Degree College v Lakshmi Narain AIR 1976 SC 888. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-36 Executive Engineer v Sri Seetaram Rice Mill 2012 AIR SCW 616. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-11 Exeter Trust Ltd v Screenways Ltd (1991) BCLC 888 : (1991) BCC 477 (CA). . . . . . . 57-5 Eyre v Milton Properties Ltd [1937] 7 Comp Cas 32 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45-8 Ezekiel v Carew & Co Ltd (1938) 8 Comp Cas 161 (Cal). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-21 Ezra Proprietary Estates Ltd v Commissioner of Income Tax [1950] 20 Comp Cas 169 (Cal).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-59, 35-63 F A C Rebello v Co-operative Navigation & Trading Co Ltd AIR 1925 Bom 105. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-86 F. De Jong & Co. In re [1946] 16 Comp Cas 158 (CA),. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-30 F. G. Robson v Dawsons Bank Ltd. [1932] 2 Comp Cas 371 (Rangoon) . . . . . . . . . . . . 40-5 Fabrik Sussen v Sussen Textile Bearings Ltd (1989) 2 CLA 202.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-33 Falco Privatstiftung v Weller-Lindhorst (2010) Bus LR 210 (ECJ). . . . . . . . . . . 31-42, 31-49 Farhat Sheikh v Esemen Metalo Chemicals P. Ltd. (1995) 1 Comp LJ 159 (CLB). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-94, 14-158 Farrar v Farrars Ltd. (1880) 40 Ch D 395. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-5, 27-10 Fateh Chand v Hindson (Patiala) Ltd . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-41, 43-53, 43-129 Fatima Tile Works v Sudarsan Trading Co. Ltd. (1992) 74 Comp Cas 423 (Mad). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-28 Fazal D Allana v Angaldas M Pakvasa AIR 1922 Bom 303. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-140 Ferguson and Forrester v. Buchanan 1920 S.C. 154. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-42 Ferguson v. Wilson in 1866 (1866) L.R. 2 Ch. 77 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-204 Ferruccio Sias v Jai Manga Ram Mukhi (1993) 12 CLA 212 (Delhi). . 1-37, 43-190, 43-192 Finance National Corporation v Goodman (1983) BCLC 203. . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-109, 43-169 Financial Services Authority v John Anderson (2010) EWHC 599 (Ch). . . . . . . . . . . . 50-31 Fine Cotton Spinning etc. Association v Harwood Cash & Co., (1907) 2 Ch 184 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-13 Fire-proof Doors Ltd, Re, (1916-17) All ER Rep 931: (1916) 2 Ch 142. . . . . . . . . . . . 64-17 Firestone Tyre & Rubber Co v Synthetics & Chemicals Ltd (1971) 41 Comp Cas 377 (Bom): (1970) 2 Comp LJ 200 (Bom). . . . . . . . . 31-55, 31-56, Â . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-32, 38-9, 38-12, 52-6 Firestone Tyre and Rubber Co v Lewellin [1957] 1 WLR 464; [1958] 33 ITR 741 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-9, 2-21
xciv
Table of cases
Firm Brij Kishore Ram Sarup v Sheo Charan Lal AIR 1938 All 69. . . . . . 9-25, 9-26, 27-11, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27-12, 27-13 First National Bank Ltd v Seth Sant Lal AIR 1958 (Punj) 328: (1958) 28 Comp Cas 402 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-5, 11-8, 11-32 Five Minute Car Wash Service Ltd, Re, (1966) 1 All ER 242: (1966) 1 WLR 745: (1966) 36 Comp Cas 566 (Ch D). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-48 Flitcroft’s case In re; (1882) 21 Ch. D 519 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-19, 3-30 Floating Services Ltd. v MV ‘San Francesco Dipalola’ (2004) 52 SCL 762 (Guj) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29-4 Florence Land & Public Works Co, Re, (1885) LR 29 Ch D 421.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-126, 14-69, 14-123, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18-14, 31-33, 31-94, 39-15 Food Distributors Ltd. v London Borough of Tower Hamlets (1976) 3 All ER 462 (CA).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-14, 2-28, 2-31 Foss v Harbottle (1843) 2 Hare 461. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34-9, 34-11, 34-12, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34-14, 34-16, 34-20, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34-24, 43-204, 49-71, 60-21 Foster v Coles (1906) 22 TLR 555. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-42 Foster v Foster (1916) 1 Ch 532. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-27, 34-24, 43-31, 49-47, 64-17 Foster v New Trinidad &c. Co. (1901) 1 Ch 208.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-64 Fowler v Commercial Timber Co. Ltd. (1930) 2 KB 1.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-25 Fowler v Gruber [2010] 1 BCLC 563, Court of Session-Upper House. . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-97 Fox v Gadsden Pty Ltd (2003) 46 ACSR 717.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-182 Fox v Martin (1895) 64 LJ Ch 473. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-44, 55-140 Franbar Holdings Limited v Casualty Plus Limited [2010] EWHC 1164 (Ch) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-141, 49-42 France v Clark (1884) 26 Ch D 257. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-44, 55-140 Fredie Ardeshir Mehta (Dr.) v Union of India (1989) 2 CLA 244 (Bom): (1991) 70 Comp Cas 210 (Bom): (1991) 1 Comp LJ 437 (Bom).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-28, 50-29, 50-34 Fruit and Vegetable Merchants Union v The Delhi Improvement Trust AIR 1957 SC 344. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-46 FS Abdul Qayum v Mahindra Land & Building Corporation Ltd. [1955] 25 Comp Cas 143 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13-8 Fulham Football Club (1987) Ltd v Richards [2012] Bus LR 606. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-4 G C Mehrotra v Deputy Collector (Collections) Sales Tax and Another (1998) 93 Comp Cas 617 (All). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-149 G Govindaraj v Venture Graphics P. Ltd [2005] 128 Comp Cas 632. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-51 G Nagrajan v A. N. Marketing Services Pvt Ltd [2009] 150 Comp Cas 641. . . . . . . . . . 55-8 G S Srikanth v Sri Lakshmi Financiers [1999] 98 Comp Cas 321 (AP) . . . . . . . . . . . 35-226 xcv
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
G Vijaylakshmi v Securities and Exchange Board of India [2000] 25 SCL 183 (AP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-229 G. Govindaraj v Venture Graphics P. Ltd. (2004) 5 Comp LJ 165 (CLB). . . . . . . . . . . 55-23 G. Govindaraj v Venture Graphics P. Ltd. (2007) 2 Comp LJ 324 (Mad): (2007) 78 CLA 377 (Mad).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-23 G.R. Parry v. Union of India [1962] 32 Comp Cas 145. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-6 G.S. Ramaswamier and Sons v Commissioner of Income-tax (1945) 13 ITR 24 (Mad). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-21 G.Vijayalakshmi v Tirupur Textiles Pvt Ltd [2012] 175 Comp Cas 1 (Mad). . . . . . . . . 55-94 Gac Electronics Ltd. (R) v Union of India (1987) 61 Comp Cas 784 (Del): (1986) 3 Comp LJ 260.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-16 Gairdnerv Lucas (1878), L. R. 3 App. Cas. 601. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-58, 51-16, 61-5 Gajanan Samadhan Lande v Sanjay Shyamrao Dhotre (2012) 2 SCC 64. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-52, 38-5 Gajra Gears Ltd. v Asha Devi (1998) 3 Comp LJ 88 (MP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-238 Galoo Ltd v Bright Grahame Murray [1995] 1 All ER 16: [1994] BCC 319.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-18 Gambart v. Ball (1863) 32 L.J.C.P. 166 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63-4 Gamlestaden Fastigheter AB v Baltic Partners Ltd and others [2007] 1 BCLC 468; [2007] BCC 272 (PC); 2007 JLR 393; [2007] 4 All E.R. 164. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-51, 55-81, 55-86 Gammon India Ltd., In re 1990 (3) Comp LJ 89 (CLB).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-64 Ganesh Das Ram Gopal v R G Cotton Mills Co. Ltd. (1945) 15 Comp Cas 32 (Oudh): AIR 1944 Oudh 318. . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-25, 27-11, 27-12 Ganesh Flour Mills C. Ltd. v T P Khaitan (1986) 60 Com Cas 28 (Delhi). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-35, 21-48, 53-12 Ganga Metal Refining Co. v CIT [1968] 38 Comp Cas 117; AIR 1967 Cal. 429 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-3, 27-9 Ganga Prasad v. Mt. Saeedan AIR 1952 All 801 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20-7 Ganga Ram v. Smt. Phulwati AIR 1970 Allahabad 446. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66-14 Garda Chemical Pvt. Ltd. v. R. Parthasarthy, Asstt. Collector, Central Excise (1984) 2 ECC 384 (Bom) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-222 Garden Gully United Quartz Mining Co v Me Lister [1875] 1 AC 39. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-15 Garikapati, v. N. Subbiah Choudhary AIR 1957 SC 540. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-7 Gartner v. Snyder, 607 F.2d 582, 586 (2d Cir. 1979) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-44, 8-11 Gates Corporation v Anand Gates (India) Pvt. Ltd. (1999) 22 SCL 76 (CLB) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54-5 Gates Corporation v Anand Gates (India) Pvt. Ltd. (1999) 98 Comp Cas 708 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-118 xcvi
Table of cases
Gaut v Dunlap 188 S.W. 1020, 1021 (Texas). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62-6, 65-19 Gee & Co. (Woolwich) Ltd., Re, [1975] Ch 52 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-243, 50-145 Geethanjali Mills Ltd. v. V Thiruvengadathan (1989) 1 Comp LJ 232 (Mad). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-144 Gemma Ltd v Davies (2008) 2 BCLC 281: 2008 BCC 812. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-17 General Commerce Ltd. v. Apparel Export Promotion Council (1990) 69 Comp Cas 158 (Del):[1990] 1 Comp LJ 297: [1990] 3 CLA 254. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-7 General Officer Commanding-in-Chief v. Dr. Subhash Chandra Yadav AIR 1988 SC 876. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-60 General Relief Association v Crown [1932] 2 Comp Cas 503 (Lahore).. . . . . . . . . . . . 35-97 George Newman & Co., Re, [1895] 1 Ch 674. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-144 German Date Coffee Co. (1882) 20 Ch D 169. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-19 German Remedies Ltd.. In Re.. (2003) 55 CLA 268: (2003) 4 Comp LJ 89 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41-8 Ghanshyam Chaturbhuj v Industrial Ceramics P Ltd (1990) 68 Comp Cas 36: (1990) 4 CLA 9 (Mad).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-41, 35-17, 35-18 GHCL Employees Stock Option Trust v India Infoline Ltd [2013] 177 Comp Cas 527 (SC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-76 Ghulam Qadir v Special Tribunal (2002) 1 SCC 33. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-20 Gibson v Barton (1875) LR 10 QB 329. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47-4, 47-7, 47-12 Gilford Motor Co, Ltd v Horne [1933] All ER Rep 109, [1933] Ch 935. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-34, 69-9 Gillies v. Dawson (1893) 20 R 1119. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40-10 Gilmore v. Shooter (1679) 2 Mod. 310. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-11 Girdhari Lal Gupta v D.N. Mehta AIR 1971 SC 2162. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-171, 35-182, Â . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-201, 35-210, 47-9 Girija Smelters Limited v Saraswathi Finance Corporation [2004] 119 Comp Cas 592 (CLB-SRB) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24-11 Girish Kumar Kharia v Industrial Forge & Engineering Co Ltd (1999) 21 SCL 234: (2000) 38 CLA 126 (Pat): (2001) 103 Comp Cas 150 (Pat). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-143 Githa Hariharan v Reserve Bank of India 1999 AIR SCW 811. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-7 GL Asia Mauritius II Cayman Linited v Pinfold Overseas Limited 2013 (4) ABR 1063 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-8 Glaxo SmithKline Pharmaceuticals Ltd v Union of India AIR 2014 SC 410. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67-9 Global Trust Bank Ltd., In re (2005) 127 Comp Cas 604 (AP).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15-27 Globe Motors Ltd v Globe United Engineering and Foundry Co. Ltd. [1975] 45 Comp Cas 429 (Delhi). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-6, 26-27 xcvii
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Globe Transport Corpn. v Triveni Engg. Works [1983] 4 SCC 707. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68-6 Glossop v Glossop (1907) 2 Ch 370. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-146, 43-53, 43-130 Glucoseries Pvt Ltd v Deb Kanta Roy (2000) 38 CLA 39: (2001) 105 Comp Cas 282 (Cal). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34-22 Gobind Pritamdas Malkani v Amarendra Nath Sircar (1980) 50 Comp Cas 219 (Cal).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-27, 46-36, 46-53, 48-49 Godfrey Phillips Ltd v Investment Trust Corpn Ltd (1953) Ch 449, (1953) 1 All ER 7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-43 Gokak Patel Volkart Ltd. v K. N. Hiremath (1991) 5 CLA 171 (SC): 1991 AIR SCW 505.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-18 Golden Ocean Group Ltd v Salgaocar Mining Industries Pvt Ltd (2012) EWCA Civ 265: (2012) 1 WLR 3674 (CA).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-7 Goldmark Enterprises Ltd v Pondy Metal and Rolling Mills Pvt Ltd (2008) 4 Comp LJ 518 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-68 Goodman v Eban Ltd [1954] 1 QB 550.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52-14 Gopal & Sons (HUF) v CIT, Kolkata AIR 2017 SC 257. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-25 Gopal K. Maheshwari v Hawk Multimedia (P) Ltd [2005] 60 SCL 382 (CLB-SRB). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24-12 Gopal Paper Mills Ltd. v. Surendra Malhotra AIR 1962 Cal 61. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69-7 Gopal Varnish CoLtd, In re (1917) 2 Ch 349 (Ch. D); Smith Knight and Co, In re (1868) 4 Ch A 20.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-33, 21-44 Gopal Vyas v Sinclair Hotels & Transportation Ltd. [1990] 3 CLA 210. . . . . . . . . . . . 50-78 Gordon Woodroffe Ltd v Trident Investment & Portfolio Services Ltd (1994) 79 Comp Cas 764 (CLB). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-31 Government of Andhra Pradesh v. Ch. Gandhi AIR 2013 SC 2113. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-10 Government Stock and Other Securities Investment Co Ltd v Christopher [1956] 1 All ER 490:[1956] 26 Comp Cas 210.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-178, 18-7 Govind Narayan Kakade v Rangnath Gopal Rajopandhye. (1930) ILR 54 Bom 226: 32 Bom LR 232: AIR 1930 Bom 572. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-5, 35-150 Govind Rubber Ltd., In re [1995] 83 Comp Cas 556 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-46 Govindaraj (G) v Venture Graphics P Ltd (2005) 128 Comp Cas 632 (CLB). . . . . . . . 64-23 Govindaraj (G) v Venture Graphics P Ltd (2007) 2 Comp LJ 324 (Mad): (2007) 78 CLA 377 (Mad).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-23 Grace v Biagioli [2006] BCC 73 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-58 Gramophone & Typewriter Co. Ltd. v Stanley (1908) 2 KB 89.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-62 Gramophone and Typewriter Ltd. v. Stanley [1908-10] All ER 833 at 837) . . . . . . . . . . 2-26 Gray v Lewis, ubi supra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34-24 Great Northern Salt Co, Re ,(1890) 44 Ch D 444. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-17 Great Offshore Ltd v Iranian Offshore Engineering & Construction Company AIR 2008 SCW 5722. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-19, 14-42, 45-4 xcviii
Table of cases
Great Western Rly. Co. v Bater (1922) 8 TC 231. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-51, 38-4 Greater Britain Re-Insurance Co. (1921) 124 LT 194.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-38 Greaves Cotton & Co Ltd v State of Maharashtra 2005 CLC 219. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-108 Greenhalgh v Ardenne Cinemas Ltd (1950) 2 All ER 1120. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34-15 Greenhalgh v Ardern Cinemas Ltd. (1946) 1 All ER 512.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-140 Greenhlgh v Mallard [1943] 2 All ER 234 (CA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-26 Greenwell v Porter [1902] 1 Ch 530. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-20, 31-17, 51-7, 51-25 Gresham House Estate Co. v. Rossa Grande Gold Mining Co. [1870 Weekly Notes 119]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66-14 Grey v. Pearson (1857) 6 HL Cas 61 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-11 Griesheim GMBH v Goyal MG Gases Pvt. Ltd. (2005) 123 Comp Cas 280: (2004) 62 CLA 141: (2005) 6 CLC 102 (CLB).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58-6 Grindlays Bank Ltd v M Joy Mathew & Another (1993) 78 Comp Cas 33 (Ker) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-35, 35-45, 35-109, 43-168 Gross v Rackind; Re Citybranch Group Ltd (2005) BCC 11 (CA); [2005] 1 WLR 3505.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-124 Group Seven Ltd v Allied Investment Corp Ltd [2014] 1 WLR 735 (Ch D). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-17, 7-7, 7-10 Growth Management Ltd and another v Mutafchiev and another [2006] EWHC 2774 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-39, 14-52 Grundt v Great Boulder Proprietary Gold Mines Ltd. (1948) 1 All ER 21.. . . . . . . . . . . 9-62 Grundt v Great Boulder Proprietary Gold Mines Ltd. (1948) 18 Comp Cas 236 (CA).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-19 Gstriecher v. Secretary of State reported in (1978) All. E.R. 82. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56-4 Guardian Association Co In re (1917) 1 Ch 431 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40-10, 41-9 Guiness v Land Corporation of Ireland [1882] 22 Ch D 349. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-10 Guinness Plc v Saunders (1990) 2 All ER 652: (1990) BCLC 402: (1990) BCC 205: (1991) 5 CLA 176 (HL) : (1990) BCLC 402. . . . . . . . . . . 43-28, 43-50 Gujarat Electricity Board v Atmaram Sungomal Poshani, AIR 1989 SC 1433. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66-6 Gujrat Travancore Agency, Cochin v CIT (1989) 177 ITR 455 (SC).. . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-119 Gunther v. Capital One, N.A., 703 F. Supp. 2d 264, 277(E.D.N.Y. 2010. . . . . . . . . . 2-42, 8-8 Gupta Coal India Pvt Ltd v Swiss Marine Services 2014 (4) ABR 353. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-7 Gurmit Singh v Polymer Papers Ltd. (2004) 44 CC B-295. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-117 Gurugobinda Basu v Sankari Prasad Ghosal AIR 1964 SC 254: (1963) 33 Comp Cas 1132 (SC): (1964) 4 SCR 311 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38-10 H C Shashtri v. Dolphin Canpack Pvt Ltd [1998] 93 Comp Cas 201 (Del). . . . . . . 1-22, 22-5 H L Bolten Engineering Co. Ltd. v T J Graham & Sons Ltd. (1957) 1 QB 159. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-41, 8-7, 35-6, 35-48, Â . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-82, 35-84, 35-122, 35-189 xcix
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
H L Bottom Engg Co Ltd v T J Graham & Sons Ltd (1956) 3 All ER 624 (CA).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-18 H M Ebrahim Sait v South Indian Industries Ltd (1938) 8 Comp Cas 308 (Mad). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-4 H V Jayaram v Industrial Credit & Investment Corpn of India Ltd [2000] 23 SCL 64 : (2000) CLC 251 : (2000) 1 CLJ 321 : (2000) 36 CLA 1 (SC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-10 H. R. Harmer Ltd., Re, (1959) 1 WLR 62 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-87 H. S. Rajsjekhar v State Bank of Mysore (2012) 1 SCC 285. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-30 H. S. Sidana v Rajesh Enterprises [1993] 77 Comp Cas 251: [1993] 11 CLA 248 (P & H). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-109, 43-167 H.B. Stockholdings Ltd. v. Jaiprakash Industries Ltd. [2003] 116 Comp Cas 29 (CLB);(2003) 52 CLA 263 (CLB). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28-7, 28-8 H.C. Kulwant Singh v. H.C. Daya Ram AIR 2014 SC 3083 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-4 H.S. Atwal v Union of India AIR 1994 SC 2531: 1994 (5) SCC 341: 1994 (3) Scale 555: 1994 (5) JT 346. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-5 Hackbridge-Hewittic and Easun Ltd. v GEC Distribution Transformers Ltd. (1992) 74 Comp Cas 543 (Mad). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-11, 2-28, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-44, 8-11 Hackney Pavilion Ltd, In re [1924] 1 Ch 276. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-36 Hakam Singh v Gammon (India) Ltd. AIR 1971 SC 740. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68-5 Hakam Singh v Gammon India Ltd [1971] 1 SCC 286. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-30 Halifax Building Society v Meridian Housing Association Ltd [1994] 2 BCLC 540 (Ch) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-13 Halt Garage, Re, (1964) Ltd [1982] 3 All ER 1016. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-21 Hammond v Prentice Brothers Ltd. (1920) 1 Ch 201. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-5 Hanil Era Textiles Ltd. v. Puromatic Filters (P) Ltd AIR 2004 SC 2432:(2004) 4 SCC 671 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68-8 Hansraj Gokuldas Ved v Nitin Dyeing & Bleaching Mills (P) Ltd. [2005] 64 CLA 64 (CLB). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-17 Hanuman Prasad Gupta v Hiralal (1970) 40 Comp Cas 1058 : (1970) 1 SCC 437. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-17, 35-10 Harben v Phillips (1883) 23 Ch D 14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-23 Hardeep Singh v State of Punjab 2014 AIR SCW 667. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-68 Hardy v Ryle 9 B & C 603. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62-6, 65-19 Hare v Gocher , [1962] 2 QB 641. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-16 Harendra Nath Ghosal v Superfoam (P.) Ltd. [1992] 9 CLA 121. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66-11 Hari Krishna Lohai v Hoolungroore Tea Co. Ltd. [1970] 40 Comp Cas 458:AIR 1969 Cal 312. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-5, 39-23 Haricharan Singh v Shivrani (1981) 2 SCC 535. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66-8 c
Table of cases
Harihar Banerji v. Ramshashi Roy [AIR 1918 PC 102]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66-13 Harihar Prasad v Bansi Missir [1932] 2 Comp Cas 31 (Patna-Full Bench). . . . . . . . . . 26-60 Harikumar Rajah v Soverign Dairy Industries Ltd. (2001) 2 CLC 1162: (2001) 2 Comp LJ 504: (2001) 41 CLA 181: (2001) 106 Comp Cas 191: (2001) 31 SCL 112 (CLB).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-23 Harinder Singh v S Karnail Singh AIR 1957 SC 271. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-23 Harish Chandra v R B Kavindra Narain Sinha (1936) 6 Comp Cas 447 (All)(FB). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-7, 35-245 Harkishin Lakhimal Gidwani v. Achyut Kashinath Wagh and Another,[1982] 52 Comp Cas 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-234 Harlowe’s Nominees P Ltd v Woodside (Lakes Entrance) Oil Co (1968) 121 CLR 483. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-92, 14-155, 55-68 Harman v BML Group Ltd (1994) BCC 502. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-28 Harold Holdsworth & Co. (Wakefield) Ltd. v Caddies (1955) 1 All ER 725: (1955) 1 WLR 252: (1955) 25 Comp Cas 205 (HL). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-11, 2-15, 2-28, 2-31, 8-11, 46-14 Harper’s Ticket Issuing and Recording Machine Ltd (1912) WN 263: 29 TLR 63. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38-13 Harrison (Saul D) & Sons plc, Re [1995] 1 BCLC 14 (CA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-35, 55-44 Harrisons and Crossfield (India) Ltd v Registrar of Companies (1980) 50 Comp Cas 426 (Ker) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67-9 Harsha Nitin Kokate v Saraswat Co-op. Bank Ltd. [2010] 159 Comp Cas 221; [2010] 99 CLA 46 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . 14-40, 14-37, 14-46 Hartley v Baird (1955) Ch 143. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-124 Hartman v. Hornsby (142 Mo 368, 44 SW 242 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60-9 Haru Das Gupta v State of West Bengal, (1972) 1 SCC 639; 1972 AIR 1293 SC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62-6 Haryana Seeds Development Corporation Ltd. v J.K. Aggarwal [1989] 65 Comp. Cas. 95/ [1989] 2 CLA 41 (Punj. & Har.). . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-13, 48-19 Hattersley v Shelburne (Earl of) (1862) 10 WR 881.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34-24 Hau Tau Khang v Sanur Indonesian Restaurant Pte Ltd & Anor [2011] SGHC 97 (Singapore, High Court). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-180 Hawks v Cuddy (No. 2) [2008] BCC 390 (Ch D).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-100, 55-102 Haycraft, etc, Mining Co, Re, (1900) 2 Ch 230. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-208, 43-136, 44-27 HCL Ltd (1994) 80 Comp Cas 228. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-34 HDFC Securities Ltd v State of Maharashtra AIR 2017 SC 61. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-71, 35-81 Hector Whaling Ltd, Re, (1936) 1 Ch D 208: (1937) 7 Comp Cas 22 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-112, 53-5, 53-22, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62-11, 65-11, 65-12 Hedley Byrne & Co Ltd v Heller & Partners Ltd [1964] AC 465 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-19 ci
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Hemendra Prasad Barooah v Bahadur Tea Co Ltd (1991) 70 Comp Cas 792 (Gau). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20-5 Hemlata Saha v Stadmed Pvt Ltd [1964] 34 Comp Cas 875 (Cal): [1964] 2 Comp LJ 75 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-119, 20-11, 20-15, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-31, 21-32 Henderson v Bank of Australia (1890) 45 Ch D 330 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-86 Henry Head & Co. v Ropner Holdings Ltd. (1951) 2 All ER 994.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-76, 37-5 Henry v Great Northern Ry. (1857) 1 De G & J 606 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-42 Herdilia Unimers Ltd. v Renu Jain (1995) 19 CLA 190 (Raj): (1998) 92 Comp Cas 841 (Raj).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-56 Heydons case [1584] 76 ER 637. [1584] 3 Co Rep 7a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63-3 Hickman v Kent Sheep Breeders’ Association (1915) 1 Ch D 881.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-5 High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan v PP Singh (2003) 4 SCC 239: AIR 2003 SC 1029.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-199, 60-4 Hilde v Dexter (1902) AC 474 (HL). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-91, 14-154, 55-67 Hill Crest Realty SND.BHD v Ram Purshottam Mittal (2010) 156 Comp Cas 597 (Del): (2010) 96 CLA 40 (Del).. . . . . . . . . . 14-77, 16-7, 37-8 Hillcrest Realty Sdn. Bhd. v Hotel Queen Road (P) Ltd, (2006) 71 SCL 41 (CLB): (2006) 133 Comp Cas 742 (CLB).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-7 Himachal Telematics Ltd. v Himachal Futuristic Communication Ltd. (1996) 8 SCL 172: (1996) 86 Comp Cas 325 (Del). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40-7 Hind Overseas Pvt Ltd v Raghunath Prasad Jhunjhunwalla (1976) 46 Comp Cas 91 (SC): (1976) 3 SCC 259: AIR 1976 SC 565: (1976) 2 SCR 226.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-13, 43-15, 55-36, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-92, 55-100, 55-107, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-128, 55-130 Hindustan Ciba-Geigy Ltd (1997) 14 SCL 115 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-81 Hindustan Commercial Bank Ltd. v Hindustan General Electric Corporation Ltd. (1960) 30 Comp Cas 367 (Cal): AIR 1960 Cal 637. . . . . . . . . . . . 17-7 Hindustan Dorr Oliver Ltd v Menon (A K) (1994) 4 Comp LJ 507: (1994) 80 Comp Cas 384 (Special Court). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-44,55-140 Hindustan General Electric Corporation Ltd. Re, (1959) 29 Comp Cas 144 (Cal).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17-15 Hindustan Investment Corpn Ltd v CIT (1955) 25 Comp Cas 57 (Cal). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-46, 14-130, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-66, 55-137 Hindustan Lever Ltd v State of Maharashtra (2004) 9 SCC, [2003] 117 Comp Cas 758 (SC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-107 Hindusthan Commercial Bank Ltd v Hindusthan General Electrical Corporation Ltd [(1960) 30 Comp Cas 367 (Cal):AIR 1960 Cal 637 . . . . . . . . . . . 40-16 cii
Table of cases
Hindustran Lever Ltd. v Bombay Soda Water Factory, AIR 1964 Mysore 183 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13-11 Hipolin Products Ltd [1966] 2 Comp LJ 61. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13-11 Hira Lal Hari Lal Bhagwati v CBI AIR 2003 SC 2545 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-75 Hitendra Vishnu Thakur v State of Maharashtra AIR 1994 SC 2623;(1994) 4 SCC 60. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-58, 51-17, 61-10 Hoare & Co. (1904) 2 Ch 208.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-38 Hoare & Co. Ltd., Re, (2) [1910] WN 87. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40-16 Hogg v Cramphorn (1967) Ch 254. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34-9 Hogg v Cramphorn Ltd [1966] 3 WLR 995; [1967] 37 Comp Cas 157 (Ch D). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-90, 14-153, 14-163, 55-66 Holland v. Dickson, (1888) 37 Ch D 669. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28-5 Hollenic and General Trust Ltd, Re, (1976) 1 WLR 1231.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-136 Holmes v Keyes (Lord) (1958) 2 WLR 772 (CA): (1958) 2 All ER 129: (1958) 28 Comp Cas 419. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-19 Holt v Faulks [2002] 2 BCLC 816, [2001] BCC 50 (Ch D).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-27 Home Ins. Co.. N. Y v. Rose, 255 S.W. 2d 861, 862 (Tex. 1953). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-18 Home Treat Ltd In re [1991] BCLC 705;[1991] BCC 165 (Ch D) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-140 Homeopathic Laboratories v. L.R. Bhandari (Homeopaths) Pvt. Ltd., 1976 Tax LR 1382. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-18 Homer District Consolidated Gold Mines, Re, (1888) 39 Ch D 546.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-3, 60-7, 43-194 Homer District Consolidated Gold Mines, Re, Ex parte Smith (1888) 39 Ch D 546.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-124 Hood Sailmakers Ltd v Axford [1997] BCC 263: [1997] 1 BCLC 721:[1996] 4 All ER 830 (QBD). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-94 Hooper v Kerr Stuart & Company (1900) 83 LT 729. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-19, 48-47, 60-7, Â . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60-9, 43-194, 43-197 Hope Mills Ltd v Sir Covasji J Readymoney (1910) 13 Bom LR 162: (1911) 10 IC 748. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-95 Horbury Bridge Coal Co, Re, (1879) 11 Ch D 109 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-86, 50-87 Horsley & Weight Ltd, Re, [1982] 3 All ER 1045. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-12 Hoshiarpur Azad Transport Co Ltd v Sutlej Finance Pvt Ltd (2001) 29 SCL 363 (P&H): (2001) 103 Comp Cas 969 (P&H). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-20 Hoshiarpur Azad Transporters P Ltd v Hoshiarpur Express Transport Co (1983) 54 Comp Cas 254 (P&H).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-44 Hotel Queen Road P. Ltd. v Hill Crest Realty Sdn. Bhd (2006) 130 Comp Cas 59 (Del).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-39 Hough v Windus (1884) 12 QBD 237 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-6 Howbeach Coco Nut Estates v Teaque (1860) 5 H&N 151.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-123 ciii
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Howrah Trading Co Ltd v CIT (1959) 29 Comp Cas 282 (SC): AIR 1959 SC 775: (1959) 36 ITR 215.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-46, 14-28, 14-130, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-66, 21-70, 35-36, 55-4, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-137, 55-139 Hrushikesh Pande v Indramani Swain (1963) 63 Comp Cas 368 (Ori). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-34, 35-43, 35-109, 43-166 HS Sidana v Rajesh Enterprises [1993] 11 CLA 248 (Punj & Har.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-35, 35-44 Hungerford Investment Trust Ltd. v. Turner Morrison & Co. Ltd ILR [1972] (1) (Cal). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-83 Hunter Kane Ltd v Watkins [2003] EWCH 186 (Ch). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-39 Hutchinson technologies Inc., In re, 852 F.2d 552 (Fed.Cir.1988).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-22 Huth v Clarke [1890] 25 QBD 391. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-15 Hyderabad Industries Ltd In re [2005] 123 Comp Cas 446 (AP). . . . . . . . . . . . . 15-25, 15-26 Hyderabad Vanaspathi Ltd. v Registrar (1986) 59 Comp Cas 654 (AP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-17 Hydrodan (Corby) Ltd, In re (1994) BCC 161. . . . . . . . . . 44-10, 44-21, 44-40, 44-63, 50-18 ICICI Bank Ltd. In re [2003] 52 CLA 181 (Guj).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-18 ICICI Ltd v Parasrampuria Synthetics Ltd [1998] 28 CLA 141:[1998] 92 Comp Cas 238 (Del) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-24 IL & FS Engineering and Construction Co. Ltd. v Wardha Power Co. Ltd. [2013] 176 Comp Cas 156 (AP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15-15 IL & FS Trust Co Ltd v Birla Perucchini Ltd. (2004) 121 Comp Cas 335 (Bom): (2003) 52 CLA 35: (2003) 4 Comp LJ 131 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . 11-8, 11-35, 14-53 Imperial Chemical Industries Ltd [1937] 2 All ER 422: [1938] 8 Comp Cas 181 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-94 Imperial Chemical Industries Ltd, Re, (1937) AC 707, (1938) 8 Comp Cas 181 (HL). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-19, 31-17, 51-6, 51-25 Imperial Chemical Industries Ltd, Re, Carruth v Imperial Chemical Industries Ltd. (1937) 2 All ER 423: (1938) 8 Comp Cas 86 (CA) and later by the House of Lords (1937) 2 All ER 422: (1938) 8 Comp Cas 181: (1937) AC 707.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-148 Imperial Ice Mfg Co. Ltd. v Manchershaw Barjorji Wadia (1889) ILR 13 Bom 415.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29-9 Incable Net (Andhra) Ltd v AP Aksh Broadband Ltd 2010 AIR SCW 3623 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-133 Inderwick v Snell 42 ER 83 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-9 India Flour Mills, In re (1934) 4 Comp Cas 137: AIR 1934 Sind 54. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40-9 India House v. Kishan N. Lalwani (2003) 9 SCC 393. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-88
civ
Table of cases
India Jute Co. Ltd. v CIT [1990] 49 Taxman 236. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-10 India v Hansoli Devi 2002 AIR SCW 3755. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-12 Indian Bank v. Satyam Fibres (India) Pvt. Ltd. [1998] 92 Comp Cas 149; [1996] 5 SCC 550. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-10 Indian Commerce & Industries Ltd v Swadharha Swarajya Sangha [1998] 31 CLA 341 (Mad) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-31 Indian Hardware Industries Ltd. and others v S.K. Gupta and another [1981] 51 Comp Cas 51 (Delhi). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-98, 50-138 Indian Medical Association v Shantha (V P) (1995) 6 SCC 651: AIR 1996 SC 550: (1996) 86 Comp Cas 803 (SC).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-44, 46-26, 46-51 Indian National Press (Indore) Ltd (1989) 66 Comp Cas 387 [MP]. . . . . . 15-8, 15-16, 15-20 Indian Overseas Bank v A.B. Senan and Another [1999] 96 Comp. Case 639 (Ker). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-168 Indian Overseas Bank v R M Marketing & Services Pvt Ltd [2002] 46 CLA (Snr.) 1 (Del). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-109, 43-168 Indian Overseas Bank v. CIT, (1970) 77 ITR 512,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19-13 Indian Seamless Enterprises Ltd In re [2015] 193 Comp Cas 25 (Bom). . . . 3-26, 3-23, 3-27 Indian Spinning Mills Ltd v Madan Shumshree Jang Bahadur [1952] 22 Comp Cas 162 (Cal). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-132 Indian Zoedone Co, Re, (1884) 26 Ch 70. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-16, 64-22 Indo Rama Synthetics (I) Ltd. v C I T (2011) 2 SCC 168 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19-14 Indowind Energy Ltd v Wescare (I) Ltd (2010) 5 SCC 306. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29-6 Indusind Enterprises & Finance Ltd., In Re., (2003) 55 CLA 254: (2003) 4 Comp LJ 80: (2003) CLC 1106 (Bom) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40-9, 41-8 Ingre v Maxwell (1964) 44 DLR 765 (Supreme Court of British Columbia).. . . . . . . . 50-46 Inland Revenue Commissioner v. Fisher’s Executors L.R. (1926) A.C. 395. . . . . . . . . . 19-8 Innes and Co. Ltd, Re, (1903) 2 Ch Div 254 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-19 Institute of Chartered Accountants of India v. Price Waterhouse AIR 1998 SC 74. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-18, 35-162 International Trade and Exhibitions India Pvt Ltd v Regional Director [2011] 168 Comp Cas 359 (Delhi). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67-5 Investment Corporation of India Ltd. (1987) 61 Comp Cas 92 (Bom) . . . . . . . . 40-10, 40-16 Investment Trust Corpn. v Singapore Traction Co. (1935) Ch 615; [1937] 7 Comp Cas 317 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-12, 51-38 Ion Exchange (India) Ltd., In re [2001] 105 Comp Cas 115 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41-4 IR Commissioners v Conbeer [1996] BCC 189:[1996] 1 BCLC 538 (Ch D).. . . . 52-14, 63-6 IRC v. G. Angus and Co. [1889] 23 QBD 579, 582. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-107 Iridium India Telecom Ltd v Motorala Incorporated & Others [2010] 160 Comp Cas 147;(2011) 1 SCC 74 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-89, 35-94, 35-100
cv
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Iridium India Telecom Ltd v Motorola Incorporated 2010 AIR SCW 6738 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-49 Iron Traders (P) Limited v Hira Lal Mittal 1964 (2) Comp LJ 171 (P&H).. . . . . . . . . . 11-24 Iron Traders Pvt. Ltd. v Hira Lal Mithal [1962] 32 Comp Cas 1022 (Punjab). . . . . . . . 21-56 Ishwar Nagar Co-operative Housing Building Society v Parma Nand Sharma AIR 2011 SC 548. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-20 Isle of Wight Railway Co. v. Tahourdin [1884] 25 Ch D 320 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-64 J Dalmia v CIT (1964) 34 Comp Cas 668 : (1964) 2 Comp LJ 69 : (1964) 53 ITR 83 (SC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-15, 26-46 J H Rayner (Mincing Lane) Ltd v Department of Trade and Industry (1989) 5 BCC 872 (HL). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-18, 43-155 J K (Bombay) Ltd v Bharti Matha Mishra [2001] 104 Com Cas 425 (SC). . . . . . . . . 35-238 J K Cotton Spg. & Wvg. Mills v. State of Uttar Pradesh AIR 1961 SC 1170 . . . 25-11, 43-64 J. K. Cotton Spinning and Weaving Mills Ltd v. Union of India AIR 1988 SC 191. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-4 J. P. Srivastava and Sons Pvt. Ltd. v Gwalor Sugar Co. Ltd. (2004) 122 Comp Cas 696 (SC):2004 AIR SCW 6298 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-151 Jabalpur Ice Manufacturing Association v CIT (1955) 27 ITR 88 (Nag).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-28, 27-14 Jadabpore Tea Co. Ltd. v Bengal Dooars National Tea Co. Ltd. (1984) 55 Comp Cas 160 (Cal).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-91, 14-154, 17-8, 55-67 Jadav Chandra Banik v Jogesh Chandra Sukla, AIR 1970 Tripura 71. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-19 Jafari-Fini v Skillglass Ltd [2007] EWCA Civ 261.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-98 Jagatram Ahuja v CGT AIR 2000 SC 3195 p. 3201: 2000 AIR SCW 3778: (2000) 164 CTR 1 (SC): (2000) 8 SCC 249: (2000) 246 ITR 609 (SC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-42, 31-47 Jagdish Mills Ltd’s [1954] 24 Comp Cas 241 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-6, 21-9 Jagdish Prasad v Paras Ram [1942] 12 Comp Cas 21 (All): AIR 1941 All 360. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-60, 35-207 Jagdish Singh v Natthu Singh (1992) 1 SCC 647. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66-7, 66-9 Jai Charan Lal Anal v State of UP , AIR 1968 SC 5. . . . . . . . . . . . 53-5, 62-12, 65-13, 65-14 Jain (S P) v Kalinga Tubes Ltd AIR 1965 SC 1535.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-54 Jameel (Mohammed) v Wall Street Journal Europe Sprl [2007] Bus LR 291(HL). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-7, 3-10, 3-11 James Baird v Henry Lees 1924 SC 83 (Court of Session) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-14 James McNaughton paper Group Ltd. v Hicks Anderson & Co. (1990) BCC 891 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-22 Janaki Printing (P.) Ltd. v Nadar Press Ltd. (2000) 3 Comp LJ 285: (2000) 37 CLA 257: (2000) 24 SCL 81 (CLB); 2001 103 CompCas 546 CLB. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-49 cvi
Table of cases
Janki Bai Sahu, et al., Plaintiffs, against Union Carbide Corporation and Warren Anderson, Defendants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-3 Jarnail Singh v Bakshi Singh (1960) 30 Comp Cas 192 (Punj): AIR 1960 Pun 455 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-36, 14-112, 14-114, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20-10, 33-8, 43-211 Jaya Bachchan v Union of India AIR 2006 SC 2119: 2006 AIR SCW 2601: (2006) 5 SCC 266. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-54, 38-7 Jaya Hind Industries Pvt Ltd v CIT (1986) 60 Comp Cas 950 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-68 Jayalakshmi Acharya v Kal Electronics & Consultants P Ltd [1997] 13 SCL 1; 1997 (90) Comp Cas 200 (CLB). . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-119, 20-12, 21-32 Jayanand Jayant Salgaonkar v Jayashree Jayant Salgaonkar and Others [2015] 190 Comp Cas 44 (Bom) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-37 Jayantbhai Manubhai Patel v Arun Subodhbhai Mehta [1989] 2 CLA 188 (SC):AIR 1989 SC 1289.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-51, 50-56, 50-69 Jayanthilal Purshottamdas Patel v Gordhandas Desai Pvt Ltd. (1968) 38 Comp Cas 405 (Bom): (1967) 1 Comp LJ 272 (Bom).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-54, 21-44, 55-139, 55-143 Jayesh R Mor v State of Guiarat [2000] 24 SCL 483(Guj) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-229 JEB Fasteners Ltd v Marks, Bloom & Co [1981] 3 All ER 289. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-20 Jermyn St. Turkish Baths, Re, (1971) 3 All ER 184. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-87, 55-134 Jermyn Street Turkish Baths Ltd., In re [1970] 3 All ER 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-5 Jigar Singh v. State of Bihar AIR 1976 SC 997. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-62 Jijabai Vithalrao Gajre v Pathankhan AIR 1971 SC 315: (1970) 2 SCC 717. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-6 Jiji Antony v JRG Securities Ltd (2011) 161 Comp Cas 312 (Ker). . . . . . . . . . . . . 17-8, 58-8 Jitendra Prasad Saha v Shyamlal Mondal (1993) 10 CLA 1 (CLB). . . . 14-90, 14-153, 55-66 JK Cotton Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd v Union of India (1987) (Supp) Scc 350 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67-6 Joblin Brewery Co Ltd., (1902) 1 Ch 79 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57-8 Jogindar Singh Palta v Time Travels Pvt Ltd. (1984) 56 Comp Cas 103 (Cal). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-24, 30-27, 46-36, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-53, 48-49, 50-122 John J. Badger v. Tandy Corporation; Court of Chancery of Delaware, New Castle. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28-7 John Shaw & Sons (Salford) Ltd v Shaw (1935) 2 KB 113. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-59, 35-207 John Smith’s Tadcaster Brewery Company Ltd. v Gresham Life Assurance Society Ltd. (1953) 1 All ER 518.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-9, 14-142 John Tinson & Co. Pvt. Ltd. v Surjeet Malhan (1997) 88 Comp Cas 750 (SC):AIR 1997 SC 1411:(1997) 3 Comp LJ 40 (SC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-34, 14-116 Johnson v Gore Wood & CO (a firm) [2001] 1 All ER 481 (HL). . . . . . . . . 1-20, 22-4, 35-32 cvii
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Johnson v. Lyttle’s Iron Agency [1877] 5 Ch. D 687 (CA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-11, 9-15 Johny Chandy v Catholic Syrian Bank Ltd [1995] 5 SCL 247: [1995] 4 Comp LJ 577:[1995] 84 Comp Cas 520:[1995] 18 CLA 313 (Ker).. . . . . 50-52 Joint Stock Discount Co. v Brown (1869) LR 8 Eq. 381. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-135 Joint Stock Discount Co. v. Brown (1866) L.R. 3 Eq. at p. 150. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-14 Jonas Hemant Bhutta v Surgi Plast Ltd (1993) 78 Comp Cas 296: (1993) 2 Comp LJ 10: (1993) 11 CLA 62 (CLB). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-8 Jonathan Allen v Zoom Developers Pvt Ltd v AIR 2015 MP 152.. . . . . . . . . . . . 50-34, 50-39 Jones and Another v Lipman and Another [1962] 1 All ER 442 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-35 Jose Da Costa v. Bascora Sadashiva Sinai Narcornin AIR 1975 SC 1843. . . . . . . . . . . . 61-9 Joseph Suche & Co Ltd, Re, (1875) 1 Ch 48. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-10 Jowitt, Re, (1992) 2 Ch 442 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-3, 26-45 Jubilee Cotton Mills, Re, (1923) 1 Ch 1, on appeal (1924) AC 958.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29-5 Judhistir Pursti v Koshal Transport (1971) 37 Cut LT 108 (Ori). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-31 Juggilal Kamlapat v CIT 1969 (1) SCR 988: AIR 1969 SC 932: (1969) 2 Comp LJ 188: (1969) 73 ITR 702. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-10, 2-9, 2-21, 7-12 Justice Chandrashekaraih v Janekere C. Krishnan AIR 2013 Supreme Court 726 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-151 Jute & Gunny Brokers Ltd. v Union of India AIR 1961 SC 1214. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66-12 Juvansinhji Balusinhji and others v. Balbhadrasinhji Indrasinhji [1962] 32 Comp Cas 1162 (Guj). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-36 Jyoti Ltd. v Kanwaljit Kaur Bhasin (1988) 1 Comp LJ 198: (1987) 62 Comp Cas 626 (Del).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-15 K Bhaskaran v S V Balan (1999) 7 SCC 510:1999 AIR SCW 3811 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66-9 K C Pandalai v South Indian General Assurance Co Ltd [1941] 11 Comp Cas 327 (Mad). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-92 K G Khosla v Rahul C Kirloskar [1996] 2 Comp LJ 281: [1997] 24 CLA 30 (Del). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-62 K Meenakshi Amma v Shree Rama Vilas Press and Publications Pvt Ltd (1992) 73 Comp Cas 275: (1995) 3 Comp LJ 267 (Ker).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-122 K N Sankaranarayanan v Shree Consultations & Services P Ltd. [1994] 3 Comp LJ 517:[1994] 80 Comp Cas 558 (Mad). . . . . . . . . . . 1-31, 1-34, 43-186 K V Reddy v Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (1998) 93 Comp Cas 287 (AP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-154 K. G. Raghavan v Foreword Advertising and Marketing Pvt. Ltd. (2002) 51 CLA 290: (2002) 111 Comp Cas 784 (CLB). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-49 K. K. Sarma v State of A. P. [2012] 173 Comp Cas 157 (AP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-19 K. P. Chackochan v Federal Bank [1989] 66 Comp Cas 95 (Ker). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-149 K. P. Varghese v Income Tax Officer, Ernakulam AIR 1981 SC 1922. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-11
cviii
Table of cases
K. R. C. S. Balkrishna Chetty and Sons & Co v State of Madras AIR 1961 SC 1152.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-85 K. R. S. Mani v Anugraha Jewellers Ltd. (2005) 126 Comp Cas 878 (Mad); 2004 61 CLA 52 Mad. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-50 K. R. S. Narayana Iyengar v T. A. Mani AIR 1960 Madras 338 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-81 K. S. Paripoornan v. State of Kerala AIR 1995 SC 1012. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-8 K. Sitaram v CFL Capital Financial Services Ltd AIR 2017 SC 1560.. . . . . . . . 35-71, 35-81 K.A. Mathai v. Kora Bibbikutty (1996) 7 SCC 212. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-80 K.G. Khosla Compressors Ltd. v Khosla Extraktions Ltd., (1986) 1 Comp LJ 211:AIR 1986 Del 151. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-15, 12-7 K.P Chackochan v Federal Bank [Corporate Law Adviser, Section III, July, 1990 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52-18 Kailash Prasad Modi v Chief General Manager, Orissa Telecommunication [1994] 3 Comp LJ 131 (Ori).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-108, 43-166 Kamal Anna Gaikwad v Anna Balaji Gaikwad 2014 (4) ABR 777 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-15 Kanailal Sur v. Paramnidhi Sadhu Khan, AIR 1957 SC 907 . . . . . . . 8-19, 9-17, 14-41, 18-4, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-57, 23-11, 31-73, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-78, 35-161, 35-240, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-18, 43-61, 45-4, 50-152 Kanchenjunga Properties Pvt. Ltd. v State of Sikkim (1991) 94 CTR 10 (Sikkim). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-9, 2-21 Kantilal Manilal And Others v Commissioner Of Income-tax [1956] 26 Comp Cas 357 (Bom).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-57, 35-60, 35-67 Kantilal Manilal v. Commissioner of Income Tax AIR 1961 SC 1038;[1961] 41 ITR 275. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-25, 35-60 Kapurchand v State of Bombay AIR 1953 SC 993. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-8 Karachi Oil Products Ltd. v Kumar Shree Narendrasinghji (1948) 18 Comp Cas 215 (Bom): AIR 1950 Bom 149. . . . . . . . 9-11, 9-45, 14-73, 21-39 Kare P. Ltd., In Re, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58-4 Karnal Distillary Co. Ltd. v Jaiswal [1950] 52 PLR 426 (Pat). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-31 Karnataka Bank Ltd. v Datar (A B) (1993) 12 CLA 1: (1994) 79 Comp Cas 417 (Kar): (1994) 4 Comp LJ 125 (Kar) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-10 Karnataka Power Transmission Corpn. Ltd v Ashok Iron Works Pvt Ltd (2009) 3 SCC 240: AIR 2009 SC 1905: 2009 AIR SCW 1502.. . . . . . . . . . . . 1-12, 31-32 Kashi Nath Pandey v Shibben Lal Saxena AIR 1959 All 54 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-18 Kashmir Singh v. Union of India 2008 AIR SCW 4814. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63-8 Kashva Mills co. Ltd. v. Union of India, A.I.R. 1973 S.C. 389. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56-4 Katni Cement and Industrial Co Ltd., In re (1937) 7 Comp Cas 348: 39 Bom LR 675: AIR 1937 Bombay 423. . . . . . . . 39-26, 40-6, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40-13, 41-7 cix
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Kaushiklal Nanalal Parikh v Mafatlal Industries Ltd [1995] 84 Comp Cas 752 (Guj) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-83 Kavalappara v States of Madras and Kerala AIR 1960 SC 1080. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24-5, 48-10 Kaye v Croydon Tramways [1898] 1 Ch 458. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-13 Kaytech International Plc, Re ,(1999) 2 BCLC 351. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-11, 44-63, 50-18 Kedar Nath Agarwal v Jay Engineering Works Ltd (1963) 33 Comp Cas 102 (Cal).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-46, 14-129, 17-10 Kediya Vanaspati Pvt Ltd v State of AP (1981) Comp Cas 398 (AP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-224 Keren Kayemeth Le Jisroel Ltd. v. I.R.C. [1931] 2 K.B. 465 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-14 Kerr v John Mottram Ltd (1940) 10 Comp Cas 241 (Ch D).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-18 Keshavji Ravji & Co. v CIT (1990) 2 SCC 231. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52-12 Keshavlal Khemchand & Sons Pvt Ltd v Union of India AIR 2015 SC 1168.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-28 Keshvan Madhavan Menon v State of Bombay AIR 1951 SC 128. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-5, 43-57, 51-16, 61-4 Kesoram Industries and Cotton Mills Ltd. AIR 1966 SC 1370, Para 32.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-34 Key & Sons Ltd (W), In re (1902) 1 Ch 467.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20-6 Khadres International Construction Ltd. v CIT (1998) 91 Comp Cas 432 (Ker) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-153 Khandelwal Udyog Ltd. and Acme Mfg. Ltd. In re, (1977) 47 Comp Cas 503 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27-6, 39-7, 39-30 Khetan v. Kedar Nath Khetan AIR 1977 SC 536; [1977] 47 Comp Cas 185 (SC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-8 Killick Nixon Ltd v Bank of India (1985) 57 Comp Cas 831 (Bom). . . . . . 9-469-53, 21-66, Â . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-137, 55-143 Killick Nixon Ltd v Dhanraj Mills Pvt Ltd (1983) 54 Comp Cas 432 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-70, 64-20 Kilnoor Ltd In re [2006] 2 WLR 974. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-17, 44-65, 50-20 Kilnoore Ltd, In re (2005) 3 All ER 730 (Ch).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-19, 44-66, 50-22 Kilpset (P) Ltd v Shekhar Mehra [1987] 62 Comp. Cas 717 (MP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-149 King v Lawson, (1905) 1 KB 541. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47-12 Kingston Cotton Mills (1896) 1 Ch 331, 346. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-8, 35-67 Kingston Cotton Mills Co (No 2), In re [1896] 2 Ch 279 (CA), per Lopes LJ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-14 Kingston Miller and Company v Thomas Kingston and Company, 29 R.P.C. 289 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-8, 12-17 Kirby v Wilkins (1929) 2 Ch 444. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-22, 21-23 Kirkness v. John Hudson and Co. Ltd [1955] 2 All ER 345. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-9 Kirloskar (S L) v Registrar of Companies (Unreported-Bombay High Court) . . . . . . . 31-38 cx
Table of cases
Kirloskar Diesel Recon Pvt Ltd v Kirloskar Proprietary Ltd AIR 1996 Bom 149.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-9, 12-18, 12-21 Kishore Lal v Employees’ State Insurance Corporation (2007) 4 SCC 579: AIR 2007 SC 1819.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-45, 46-27, 46-51 Kishore Ramalu Telang v Municipal Commissioner, Nagpur 2015 (5) ABR 671. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62-7 Kishore Y. Patel v Patel Engineering Co. Ltd. (1994) 79 Comp Cas 53 (Bom): (1992) 8 CLA 179. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-23 Kleinwort Benson Ltd v Malaysia Mining Corp Bhd [1989] 1 All ER 785;[1989] 5 BCC 337 (CA).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-49 Knight’s case LR 2 Ch 321. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-17 Kodali Kumara Swamy v State of A.P AIR 1992 AP 170.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-19, 30-34 Koenigsblatt v Sweet [1923] 2 Ch 314. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60-4, 43-193 Kotah Transport Ltd. v. State of Rajasthan [1967] 37 Comp Cas 285 (Raj). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-15 Kothandaraman (K R) v CIT (1976) 62 ITR 348 (Mad).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-28 Kothari Textiles Ltd. and Others v. Commissioner of Wealth-tax, Madras [1963] 33 Comp Cas 217 (Madras) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-52, 26-64 K P Varghese v ITO (1981) 131 ITR 597 (SC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67-6 Kretztechnik AG v Finanzamt Linz [2005] 1 WLR 3755. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-34 Krishi Foundry Employees’ Union v Krishi Engines Ltd. (2003) 117 Comp Cas 340 (AP): (2003) 56 CLA 146 (AP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-7, 2-12, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-29, 2-48, 8-15 Krishna (T V) v Andhra Prabha (P) Ltd. (1960) 30 Comp Cas 437 (AP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-5 Krishna Kishore Firm v Government of A P (1991) 1 SCC 184: AIR 1990 SC 2292. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-19 Krishna Mills Ltd v The State [1957] 27 Comp Cas 388 (AJCC).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-66 Kshounish Chowdhury v Kero Rajendra Monolithics Ltd. (2002) 1 Comp LJ 552 (CLB). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-3 Kuldip Singh v State (1988) 1 Comp LJ 95 (Del) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-17 Kulu Valley case (1958) 28, Comp Cas 29. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-10, 21-12, 21-13, 21-18 Kundan Singh v Moga Transport Co Pvt Ltd [1987] 62 Comp Cas 600 (P&H) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-35, 35-45, 43-165 Kunjukrishnan v. Kerala Legis. Assembly AIR 1964 Kerala 194 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-128, 43-130, 43-133 Kunnamkulam Paper Mills Ltd v SEBI [2012] 174 Comp Cas 149 (Kar) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-183, 18-10 Kuriakose v PKV Group Industries [2002] 111 Comp Cas 826 (Kar). . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-158 Kusum Products Ltd. In re (1999) 98 Comp Cas 10: (2000) 36 CLA 29 (Cal). . . . . . . . 33-6 cxi
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Kuttanad Rubber Co Ltd v K T Ittiyavirah (1997) 88 Comp Cas 438 (Ker). . . . . . . . 55-151 L H Charles & Co. Ltd. In re, (1935) WN 15 Ch D. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57-10 L I C of India v Escorts Ltd supra. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-141 L R Walker Settles, In re. [1935] 1 Ch. 567. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-39 L’Office Cherifien des Phosphates v. Yamashita-Shinnihon Steamship Co.Ltd [1994] 1 AC 486; [1994] 1 All ER 20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-12, 61-13 La Societe Anonyme, etc. v Panhard Levassor Motor Co. Ltd. (1901) 2 Ch 513 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-57 Labh Singh (S) v Paneser Mechanical Works P Ltd (1987) 61 Comp Cas 618 (P&H): (1987) 2 Comp LJ 81.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-86 Laguna Holdings P. Ltd. v. Eden Park Hotels P. Ltd. [2013] 176 Comp Cas 118 (Delhi). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-131 Lagunas Nitrate Co. Ltd. v Henry Schroeder & Co. & Schmidt (1901) 85 LT 22: (1901) 17 TLR 625. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-6, 26-11, 26-15, 35-67 Lakatamia Shipping Co Ltd v Su & Others [2015] 1 WLR 291 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-17, 1-22, 7-11 Lakshmana Mudliar v Emperor (1932) 2 Comp Cas 387 (Mad): AIR 1932 Mad 497. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-146, 43-41, 43-53, 43-129 Lakshmana Pillai (S S) v Registrar of Companies (1977) 47 Comp Cas 652 (Mad). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-41 Lal (D I) v Ganguli (S) (1990) 68 Comp Cas 576 (Del). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-65, 55-141 Lalit Mohan Pandey v Pooran Singh AIR 2004 SC 2303 = 2004 AIR SCW 2775 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-102, 43-106 Lalita Shivaram Ubhaykar v CTO [1975] 35 STC 267 (Kar). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-161 Lalithamba Bai v Harrisons Malayalam Ltd (1988) 63 Comp Cas 662 (Ker): (1988) 2 Comp LJ 41 (Ker).. . . . . . 9-45, 21-39, 21-66, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-208 43-209, 55-4, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-138, 55-142 Land Co. of Ireland (1869) 4 Ch App 460 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-52, 59-4 Land Credit Company of Ireland, Re, (1869) LR 4 Ch Ap 473. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60-7, 60-15, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-194, 43-200 Lands Allotments Co., Re, (1894) 1 Ch 616. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-12 Larsen & Toubro Ltd v Haresh Jagtiani AIR 1991 SC 1420: (1991) 2 Comp LJ 1.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-15, 14-68, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-33, 35-138 Larsen & Toubro Ltd., In re. (2004) 60 CLA 335 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41-9 Latchford Premier Cinema Ltd v Ennion & Paterson (1931) 2 Ch 409: (1933) 2 Comp Cas 106. . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-146, 43-41, 43-53, 43-129 Lauri v Renad (1892) 3 Ch 402 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-4, 61-10 Law Society v KPMG Peat Marwick [2000] 4 All ER 540. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-25 cxii
Table of cases
Lawrence v West Somerset Ry. Co. (1918) 2 Ch 250.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-10, 35-68 Laxmi Co v CIT (1959) 37 ITR 461 (All): AIR 1960 All 278.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-38 Laxmi Iron & Steel Mfg Co Ltd v Emperor (1934) 4 Comp Cas 285 (Lah): AIR 1932 Lah 533 (SB). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-21 Laxmi Printing Ltd. v Assistant Registrar (1990) 1 CLA 175 (Cal). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-17 Laxmi Verma v State of Maharashtra (2010) 5 SCC 329: AIR 2010 SC 2653. . . . . . . . 43-40 Laxmibai v Bhagwantbuva 2013 AIR SCW 949 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-48 Laxminarayan R. Bhattad v State of Maharashtra (2003) 5 SCC 413. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-88 Lebon v Aqua Salt Co Ltd [2009] 1 BCLC 549 (PC).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-97 Lee Behrens & Co, In re [1932] 2 Comp Cas 588 (Ch). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-79 Lee Panavision Ltd. v Lee Lighting Ltd. (1992) BCLC 22: (1991) BCC 620 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-51 Lee v Lee’s Air Farming Ltd. 1961 AC 12: (1961) 31 Comp Cas 233 (HL). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-23 Lee v Showmen’s Guild [1952] 1 All ER 1175 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68-6 Leeds Estate Building case (supra). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-8 Leeds Estate Co. v Shepherd (1887) 36 Ch D 787. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-8, 35-67, 48-15 Lehman Brothers International (Europe) (No. 2), Re, [2010] Bus LR 489. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41-9 Lennard’s Carrying Co. Ltd. v. Asiatic Petroleum Co. Ltd. (1915) AC 705 HL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-40, 8-7, 35-5, 35-54, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-70, 35-84, 35-95, 35-116, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-188, 35-205, 43-144 Lester v. Garland 15 Ves. 248. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62-9, 65-9 Levy v Abercorris Slate & Slab Co (1887) 37 Ch D 260. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23-7 Lexi Holdings (in administration) v Luqman [2009] 2 BCLC 1 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-133 Li Taka Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v State of Maharashtra [1998] 91 Comp Cas 871 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-107 Liberated Permanent Benefit Building Society, In re, (1894) 71 LT 406 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38-14 LIC of India v Escorts Ltd (1986) 1 Comp LJ 91 (SC): (1986) 59 Comp Cas 548 (SC): AIR 1986 SC 1370: (1986) 1 SCC 264. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-4, 2-5, 2-7, 2-44, 2-47, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-6, 7-7, 7-12, 8-11, 8-14, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-65, 31-13, 35-40, 35-207, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-241, 43-4, 43-6, 50-65, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-26, 55-4 Life Insurance Corporation of India v Dinanath Mahadeo Tembhekar AIR 1976 Bom 395. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-107
cxiii
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Lila Vati Bai v State of Bombay AIR 1957 SC 521: 59 Bom LR 934: 1957 SCJ 557: 1957 SCR 721.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-42, 31-46 Liladhar Shamji v Rehmubhoy Allana (1891) ILR 15 Bom 164.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-19 Lister v Romford Ice & Cold Storage Co. Ltd. (1967) 1 All ER 125 (HL). . . . . . . . . 35-135 Liverpool Household Stores, Re, (1890) 59 LJ Ch 616. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-21 Lloyd Cheyham & Co. [1987] BCLC 303. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-22 Loch v John Blackwood Ltd (1924 AC 783) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-100 Lockheed-Arabia Corpn v Owen [1993] QB 806 at 814; [1993] 3 All ER 641. . . . . . . . 63-9 Lo-Line Electric Motors Ltd, Re, (1988) 2 All ER 692.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-14 London & General Bank (No 2), Re, [1895] 2 Ch 673 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-18 London & General Bank Ltd, In re (1895) 2 Ch 166 (CA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-32 London Chartered Bank of Australia, In re, (1893) 3 Ch 540 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40-5 London Financial Association v Kelk (1884) 26 Ch D 107 (CA).. . . . . . . . . . . . 11-10, 11-19 London Flats Ltd, Re, [1969] 2 All ER 744, [1969]1 WLR 711, [1970] 40 Comp Cas 593, [1970] 1 Comp LJ 28.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-46, 50-48 London School of Electronics, In re [1985] BCLC 273; [1985] 1 BCC 99,400; [1986] Ch 211. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-74 Longfield Parish Council v Wright [1918] 88 LJ (Ch) 119.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-12 Loquitur Ltd, Re, [2003] 2 BCLC 442 (Ch D). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-130 Lord Macdonald v Finlayson (1885) 12 Rettie 231. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-6 Lord Mansfield in Pugh v. Duke of Leeds 2 Cowp. 714. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-10 Lord Mayor of Sheffield Corporation v Barclay (1905) AC 392 (HL).. . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-99 Lothian Jute Mills Co. Ltd. in re [1951] 21 Comp Cas 290 (Cal) . . . . . . . . . . 50-102, 50-132 Sangramsinh P. Gaekwad v Shantadevi P. Gaekwad (Dead) by LRs (2005) 123 Comp Cas 566 (SC); (2005) 3 Comp LJ 385 (SC); (2005) 11 SCC 314. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-53 Lubbock c British Bank of South America [1892] 2 Ch 198.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-64 Lucas v Fitzgerald (1903) 20 TLR 16.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-7, 35-67 Luxmi Tea Co. Ltd. v Pradip Kumar Sarkar (1990) 67 Comp Cas 518 (SC): (1989) 2 CLA 399: (1989) 3 Comp LJ 285.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-59, 46-15, 49-24 Luxor (Eastbourne) Ltd. v. Cooper 1941 AC 108; [1941] 1 All ER 33. . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-19 M C Duraiswami v Sakthi Sugars Ltd. [1980] 50 Comp Cas 154. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-149 M C Mehta v Union of India (1986) 1 Comp LJ 251. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-222 M K Ranganathan and Another v. Government of Madras AIR 1955 SC 604. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24-9 M M Pulimood v Registrar of Firms [1987] 61 Comp. Cas. 209. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-4, 27-10 M. A. A. Annamalai v State of Karnataka [2010] 158 Comp Cas 369 (SC):2010 AIR SCW 6846. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-78 M. L. Gupta v DCM Financial Services Ltd (2011) 168 Comp Cas 381 (Delhi).. . . . . 43-44 cxiv
Table of cases
M. S. D. C. Radharamanan v M. S. D. Chandrasekara Raja 2008 AIR SCW 2402; 2008 (6) SCC 750: 2008 AIR (SC) 1738: 2008 (5) SCR 182: 2008 (3) SCALE 650: 2008 (4) KCCR 299 (SN); [2008] 143 Comp Cas 97 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-53 M.G. Mohanraj v Mylapore Hindu Parmanent Fund Ltd. [1990] 1 Comp. LJ 87. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52-7 M.J. Shanley Contracting Ltd., Re, (1979) 124 Sol Jo 239 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-145 M.K. Sreenivasan, In re [1944] 14 Comp Cas 193. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-140 M.L. Lakhotia v. State (1988) 3 Comp LJ 114. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-103, 35-195 M.R. Electronic Components Ltd v Assistant Registrar of Companies (1987) 61 Comp Cas 8 (Mad). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-35, 50-39 M.S. Madhusoodhanan v. Kerala Kaumudi (P) Ltd. and others (2004) 9 SCC 204:AIR 2004 SC 909. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66-15 Macacura v Northern Assurance Co. Ltd. (1925) AC 619 (HL).. . . . . 1-21, 7-7, 22-4, 35-32 MacDougall v Gardiner (1875) 1 Ch D 13 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34-21, 34-24 Mackenzie & Co Ltd (1916) 2 Ch 450. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-140 Mackinnon Mackenzie and Co. Private Ltd. v Ibrahim Mahommad Issak AIR 1970 SC 1906.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-24 MacLaren v Thompson (1917) 2 Ch 41. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-23 Madan & Co. v Wazir Jaivir Chand AIR 1989 SC 630 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53-8, 66-8 Madanlal Fakirchand Dudhediya v Shree Changdeo Sugar Milla Ltd [1958] 28 Comp Cas 312 (Bom).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18-4, 21-58, 23-12, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-61 Madanlal Fakirchand Dudhediya v Shree Changdeo Sugar Mills Ltd AIR 1962 Supreme Court 1543 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-150 Madhava Ramachandra Kamath v Canara Banking Corpn. Ltd (1941) 11 Comp Cas 78 (Mad): AIR 1941 Mad 354.. . . . . . . . . . . . 14-100, 21-26, 21-42 Madhukar G. E. Patankar v Jaswant Chobbildas Rajani (1977) 1 SCC 70: AIR 1976 SC 2283. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-53, 31-56, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38-5, 38-9, 38-10 Madhusoodhanan (MS) v Kerala Kaumudi Pvt Ltd (2003) 117 Comp Cas 19 (SC): (2003) 55 CLA 372 (SC): (2003) 46 SCL 695 (SC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-22 Madras & Southern Mahratta Railway Co v Bezwada Municipality AIR 1944 PC 71. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-16 Madras Marine and Co. v State of Madras 1986 (3) SCR 236: AIR 1986 SC 1760: 1986 (3) SCC 552: 1986 (2) Scale 126 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-15 Madras Petrochem Ld. v Commissioner of Customs, Chennai 2007 (218) ELT 712 (Trib). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-114 Madras Tube Co Ltd v Hari Kishen Somany (1985) 1 Comp LJ 195 (Mad). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-27, 43-31 cxv
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Madura Mills Co Ltd, Re, (1937) 7 Comp Cas 71 (Mad): AIR 1937 Mad 259. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-21 Mafiaraj Shri Govindlalji Ranchhodlalji v CIT (1958) 34 ITR 92 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-51, 31-94, 38-5 Mahabir Prasad Jalan v Bajarang Prasad Jalan [2000] 102 Comp Cas 81 (Cal). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-3 Mahabir Singh v. Jai Singh [1978] 48 Comp Cas 558 (Delhi). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-5 Mahad v Entry Clearance Officer Officer [2010] WLR 48 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-18 Mahadeo v Shantibhai (1969) 2 SCR 422 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-51, 31-53, 38-4, 38-6 Mahadeolal Kanodia v. Administrator General of West Bengal AIR 1960 SC 936: 1960 (1) SCJ 15:1960 (3) SCR 578. . . . . . . . . . . 43-57, 51-16, 61-15 Mahalakshmi Mills Co. Ltd. v State 1970 (1) Comp LJ 80 (Raj).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-25 Mahalaxmi Mills Co. Ltd. v State (1969) 39 Comp Cas 347 (Raj) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-124 Mahalaxmi Oil Mills v. State of Andhra Pradesh AIR 1989 SC 335. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-62 Mahalderam Tea Estate Pvt Ltd v D N Prodhan [1979] 49 Comp Cas 529 (Cal). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-172, 35-183, 35-211 Mahaliram Santharia v Fort Gloster Jute Mfg Co Ltd (1954) 24 Comp Cas 311 (Cal), AIR 1955 Cal 132.. . . . . . . . . 9-20, 31-17, 51-25, 51-32 Maharaj Kumar Mahedra Singh v Lake Palace Hotels & Motels (P) Ltd. [1985] 58 Comp Cas 805 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-178 Maharaja Exports v Apparels Exports Promotion Council (1986) 60 Comp Cas 353 (Del). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-113, 53-7, 53-22, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62-12, 65-12 Maharani Yogeshwari Kumari v Lake Shore Palace Hotel Pvt Ltd (1995) 3 Comp LJ 418 (Raj): (1996) 20 CLA 107 (Raj).. . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-161, 43-125, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-94 Maharashtra Power Development Corporation Ltd v Dabhol Power Co (2004) 120 Comp Cas 560 (Bom-DB): (2004) 3 Comp LJ 58 (Bom).. . . . . . 43-123, 50-5 Maharashtra SFC v Jaycee Drugs & Pharmaceuticals (P.) Ltd. [1991] 2 SCC 637. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-84 Maharashtra State Board of Secondary & Higher Secondary Education v. Paritosh Bhupesh Kumar Sheth AIR 1984 SC 1543. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25-11 Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd v Datar Switchgear Ltd [2010] 159 Comp Cas 545 (SC);2010 AIR SCW 6151. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-72 Maharashtra State Mining Corporation Ltd v Sunil 2006 AIR SCW 2358;[2006] 73 CLA 145 (SC). . . . . . . . . . . . 43-201, 48-47, 60-5, 60-9 Mahavir Weaves Pvt Ltd, In re, (1996) 2 Comp LJ 56 (Guj). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-14 Mahony v East Holyford Mining Co (Supra.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-52 Major Conville v CIT [1935] 3 ITR 404 (Lahore). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-85
cxvi
Table of cases
Major Mella Singh v President, Jullundur Club Ltd [1969] 39 Comp Cas 1018 (P&H) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-126 Makhan Lal Jain v Amrit Banaspati Co Ltd [1953] 23 Comp Cas 100 (All). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-147 Maksud Saiyed v State of Gujarat and Others (2008) 5 SCC 668,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-77 Malbar & Pioneer Hosiery Pvt Ltd, Re, (1985) 57 Comp Cas 570 (Ker) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-5, 11-7, 11-32 Malhati Tea Syndicate Ltd v Revenue Officer [1973] 43 Comp Cas 337 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13-12 Malhati Tea Syndicate Ltd., Re, [1951] 21 Comp Cas 323 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-101, 50-131 Malkiat Singh v State of Punjab 1996 (7) SCC 634: 1996 SCC (L&S) 656.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-23, 44-14, 44-18, 44-38, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-64, 50-19, 50-21 Malli Dei v kanchan Prava Dei, AIR 1973 Orissa 83. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-35 Malyalam Plantations (India) Ltd., In re [1985] 2 Comp LJ 409. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-31 Mamta Sen v L.I.C. of India [1982] 52 Comp Cas 520. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-34 Man Nutzfahrzeuge AG v Freightliner Ltd and Ernst & Young [2008] BCLC 22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-26 Manabendra Shah (H H) v Official Liquidator, Indian Electric Tools Corporation Ltd. (1977) 47 Comp Cas 356 (Del).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-14 Management of Safdarjung Hospital v K.S. Sethi AIR 1970 SC 1407.. . . . . . . . 30-34, 30-19 Manavendra Chitnis v Leela Chitnis Studios P. Ltd. (1985) 58 Comp Cas 113 (Bom).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58-4 Mancetter Developments Ltd. v. Garmanson Ltd. (1986) 2 BCC 98, 924. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-53 Mancini v Mancini [1999] NSWSC 799 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-20, 49-95 Maneckchowk & Ahmedabad Mfg. Co. Ltd., In re (1970) 40 Comp Cas 819 (Guj) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-3, 17-8, 39-19, 39-20, 39-26, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-47, 40-6, 41-6, 50-142 Maneckji Pestonji Bharucha v Wadilal Sarabhai and Co AIR 1926 PC 38. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-46, 55-140 Mangal Sain v Indian Merchants Bank Ltd AIR 1928 Lah 240. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-20, 21-21 Mani (M S) v Madhusoodonan (M S) (1991) 5 CLA 187 (Ker) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-14 Manik Chand v Ramchandra (1980) 4 SCC 22 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-4 Manipal Housing Finance Ltd v Manipal Stock & Share Brokers Ltd (1999) 98 Comp Cas 432 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-9 Manish Trivedi v State of Rajasthan 2013 AIR SCW 6365.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-52 Manjari Devi v Usha Devi AIR 2014 Chh 22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-118 Manjuli v Civil Judge AIR 1970 Bom 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-18
cxvii
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Mannalal Khetan v Kedar Nath Khetan (1977) 47 Comp Cas 185 (SC): AIR 1977 SC 536: (1977) 2 SCC 424. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-28, 21-3, 21-8, 21-30, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-44, 21-46, 21-61, 25-12, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-11, 31-13, 44-33, 55-143 Manoj Kumar Sonthalia v Nariman Point Building Service & Trading P Ltd. [1995] 84 Comp Cas 559 (Mad). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52-27 Maratt Rubber Ltd v J K Maratukalam [2000] 40 CLA 183 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-239 Markanda Sahu v Lal Sadananda Singh AIR 1952 Orissa 279 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-27 Marren v Dawson Bentley & Co Ltd [1961] 2 All ER 270 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-21 Marshall Sons & Co. (India) Ltd v ITO (1997) 223 ITR 809. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42-7 Marshall Sons & Co. (India) Ltd. v. ITO (1992) 195 ITR 417. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42-5 Marshall’s Valve Co. v Manning, Wardle & Co (1909) 1 Ch 267.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-64, 34-24 Martin Castelino v Alpha Omega Ship Management (P.) Ltd. (2001) 41 CLA 271: (2001) 33 SCL 210 (CLB).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-135 Marturi Umamaheswara Rao v Pendyala Venkatrayudu [1970] 40 Comp Cas 751 (AP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57-16 Maruti Ltd v Pan India Plastic Pvt Ltd [1995] 18 CLA 291 (P&H). . . . . . . . . 35-109, 43-167 Marwari Stores Ltd. v Gouri Shankar Goenka (1936) 6 Comp Cas 285 (Cal): AIR 1936 Cal 327. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-13 Marx v Estates & General Investments Ltd. [1975] 3 All ER 1064. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52-7 Maryboug & Kyel Tea Co. Ltd., In re. [1977] 47 Comp Cas 802 (Cal). . . . . . . . . 10-6, 39-24 Mathalone (R) v Bombay Life Assurance Co. Ltd (1954) 24 Comp Cas 1 (SC): AIR 1953 SC 385. . . . . . . . . . . 17-7, 21-65, 21-70, 55-141 Mathews v Great Northern Ry (1859) 28 LJ Ch. 375. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-42 Mathura Prasad Saraf v CLB (1979) 49 Comp Cas 371 (Cal). . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-13, 35-242 Mau Cold Storage and Khandsari Sugar Factory Ltd v ROC (1985) 57 Comp Cas 37 (All). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-26 Maung Ng We v. Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc., No. 99 Civ. 9687, 2000 WL 1159835, at 5 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 15, 2000). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-40, 8-6 Maung Tun Nyun AIR 1935 Ran 108: (1935) 36 Cri LJ 953 (Ran). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-11 Mawcon Ltd, Re, [1969] 1 WLR 78. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60-6, 43-194 Maya Rani Punj v CIT, Delhi. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-16, 35-18 Mayurbhanj (1999) 2 SCC 627 para 11: AIR 1999 SC 1120. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38-5 McLeod & Co v S K Ganguly, (1975) 43 Comp. Cas. 563 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-26 McMillan v Guest (1942) AC 561: (1942) 1 All ER 606 (HL) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-51, 38-4 Md Shamim Ahmed v Union of India [2011] 163 Comp Cas 107 (Gau). . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-35 Md. Shahbuddin v State of Bihar 2010 AIR SCW 3211. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-42, 45-4 Mea Corporation Ltd, Re, (2007) 1 BCLC 618: (2007) BCC 288. . . . . . 44-16, 44-65, 50-19
cxviii
Table of cases
Mechanisations (Eaglescliff) Ltd. In re [1965) 2 WLR 702 [1965] 35 Comp. Cas. 478 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57-23, 64-10 Medchl Chemicals & Pharma (P) Ltd v Biological E. Ltd 2000 AIR SCW 682 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-73 Mehta Teja Singh & Co (Agencies) v Globe Motors Ltd (1983) 54 Comp Cas 883 (Del).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-60 Menler v Hooper’s Telegraph Works Ltd (1874) LR 9 Ch. App. 350.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34-14, 34-15, 34-24 Mercantile Trading Co, In re (1869) 4 Ch App 475. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-30, 35-66 Meridian Global Funds Management Asia Ltd v Securities Commission [1995] 3 All ER 918 (PC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-86, 35-88, 35-99 Messer Holdings Ltd v Shyam Madanmohan Ruia [2010] 159 Com Cas 29 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-36, 21-36 Metropolitan Saloon Omnibus Co. v Hawkins (1859) 4 H & N 87. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-9 Meyer v Scottish Co-operative Wholesale Society 1954 SC 381. . . . . . . . . . . . 55-12, 55-110 Meyer, (1959) AC 324 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-87 Michael Design Pic. v Cooke (1987) 2 All ER 332 CA. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69-7 Miheer Hemant Mafatlal v Mafatlal Industries Ltd. (1987) 79 Bom LR 89 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-124 Milan Sen v. Guardian Plasticote Ltd. [1996] 9 SCL 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-95, 14-158 Miles v Safe Deposit Trust Co. (1921) 66 Law Ed 923. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17-7 Milind Shripad Chandurkar v Kalim M. Khan (2011) 4 SCC 275. . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-4, 35-30 Millington v. Fox (3 My & Cr. 338). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-3 Mills v Northern Rl. (1870) 5 Ch App 621.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-10, 35-68 Minster Assets PLC, Re, (1985) BCLC 200. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-136 Mirza Ahmed Namazi, Re, AIR 1924 Mad 703. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-20 Mission Capital plc v Sinclair [2010] 1 BCLC 304 (Ch D). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-54, 48-49 Mitchell & Hobbs (UK) Ltd v Mill [1996] 2 BCLC 102. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-30 Mithilesh Kumari v. Prem Behari Khare AIR 1989 SC 1247. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-16 Modal Bank of India v Janwi Narain (1932) 2 Comp Cas 137 (Lah).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-95 Modi (V M) v State of Gujarat (1997) 88 Comp Cas 871 (Guj).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-56 Mohan Chandra v The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India AIR 1973 Del 91. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-146, 43-41, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-53, 43-129 Mohan Exports Ltd. v Tarun Overseas (P.) Ltd. [1994] 14 CLA 279 (Delhi). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-43 Mohan Lal v Bharat Electronics Ltd (1981) 3 SCC 225 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-31 Mohan Singh And Another v Shivam Communications Pvt. Ltd. and Others (2005) 66 CLA 18: (2005) 124 Comp Cas 86 (CLB). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-135
cxix
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Mohanraj (MG) v Mylapore Hindu Permanent Fund Ltd (1990) 1 Comp LJ 87 (Mad). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53-4 Mohd. Ayub v State of U. P. 2010 AIR SCW 103 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-23 Mohmd. Yunus Saleem v Shivkumar Shastri AIR 1974 SC 1218.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-51 Mohmedalli v Union of India AIR 1964 SC 980. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-85 Monecor (London) Limited v Euro Brokers Holdings Limited [2003] EWCA Civ 105. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-141, 49-42 Monolithic Building Co., In re [1915] 1 Ch. 643,667 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57-14 Montari Industries Ltd. v Montari Overseas Ltd. (1995) 18 CLA 58 (Delhi). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-7, 12-13, 12-17, 35-56 Moore v I Bresler Ltd [1944] 2 All ER 515.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-98 Moorgate Mercantile Holdings Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-85 Moorthy (M.) v Drivers & Conductors Bus Services (P) Ltd. (1991) 71 Comp Cas 136 (Mad): (1991) 1 Comp LJ 266 (Mad)(DB). . . . . . . . . . . 43-95 Moosa Goolam Arif v Ebrahim Goolam Ariff (1913) ILR 40 Cal 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-4 Morgan Crucible Co. Plc v Hill Samuel & Co. Ltd. [1990] BCC 686. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-23 Morgan Stanley Mutual Fund v Kartick Das (1994) 81 Comp Cas 318: (1994) 3 Comp LJ 27: (1994) 14 CLA 181: (1994) 1 SCL 19 (SC) : (1994) 2 CTJ 385 (SC) (CP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-69, 14-123, 14-126, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18-14, 31-93, 39-15, 50-66 Morgan Stanley Mutual Fund v. Kartick Das, 1994 AIR SCW 2801: (1994) 4 SCC 225. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-106 Morris v. N.Y. State Dep’t of Taxation & Fin., 623 N.E.2d 1157, 1160 (N.Y. 1993).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-44, 2-46, 8-11 Morrison & Co. Ltd. v Hungerford Investment Trust Ltd. AIR 1969 Cal 238. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-10 Mosely v Koffyfontein Mines Ltd. (1911) 1 Ch. 73. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-69, 14-122, 18-14 Mosely v Koffyfontein Mines Ltd. (1942) 1 Ch 235. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-15 Mother Care (India) Ltd. v Prof. Ramaswamy P. Aiyar (2004) 51 SCL 243. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-40 Motilal Kanji & Co v Natvarlal M. Jhaveri [1932] 2 Comp Cas 64 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40-5 Motilal Kejriwal v Indian Overseas Airlines Ltd. AIR 1959 Cal 117: [1960] 30 Comp Cas 390 (Cal). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23-10 Motion Pictures Association, Re, [1974] 44 Comp Cas 298 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-101, 50-132 Motor Finance (P) Ltd. (In Liquidation) v Registrar of Companies (1970) 40 Comp Cas 6 (AP): (1970) 1 Comp LJ 121 (AP).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-27, 35-62 Movitex Ltd. v Bulfield (1988) BCLC 104 (Ch D) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-48 Moxham v Grant (1900) 1 QB 88 (CA).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-29, 35-66 Mozley v Alston (1847) 1 Pg 790. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34-12, 34-24, 49-74 cxx
Table of cases
MRF Ltd v Manohar Parrikar 2010 AIR SCW 5742 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59-4 Mrs. Larley v. Mr. John AIR 2004 SC 53 (FB). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-5 Mrs. Promila Bansal v. Wearwell Cycle (India) Co. Ltd. [1978] 48 Comp. Cas. 202 (Delhi). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-12 Mst. L.M.S. Ummu Saleema v. B.B. Gujaral and Anr. (1981) 3 SCC 317:AIR 1981 SC 1191. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66-14 Muir Mills Unit of N.T.C. (U.P.) Ltd. v Swayam Prakash Srivastava 2007 AIR SCW 58: AIR 2007 SC 519: (2007) 1 SCC 491.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-21, 30-36 Mukkatukkara Catholic Co Ltd v MV Thomas (1995) 4 Comp LJ 311 (Ker). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-31 Mulk Raj Bhalla v Peoples Bank of Northern India Ltd [1936] 6 Comp Cas 54 (Lahore). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-70 Mumtaz Bank Ltd. v Syed Masud Ali Chishti (1937) 7 Comp Cas 230 (Lah): AIR 1937 Lah 812 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-127 Municipal Corporation of Delhi v Purshottam Dass Jhunjhunwala (1983) 1 SCC 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-220 Municipal Corporation of Delhi v Ram Kishan Rohatgi (1983) 1 SCC 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-172, 35-182, 35-193, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-218, 47-9 Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. J. B. Bottling Co. (P.) Ltd. [1975] Cri LJ 1148 [FB]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-82 Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Ram Kishan Rohtagi (1983) 1 SCC 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Municipal Mutual Insurance Ltd v Harrop [1998] BCLC 540 (Ch D). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60-9, 60-16, 43-197, 43-200 Munshi Ram v. Municipal Committee, Chheharta AIR 1979 SC 1250. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-26 Murali (T) v State (1976) 46 Comp Cas 613 (Mad). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-41 Murarka Paint & Varnish Works Ltd. v Mohanlal Murarka (supra); see also Scott v Scott (1943) 1 All ER 582.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-62 Murarka Paint & Varnish Works P Ltd. v Mohanlal Murarka (1961) 31 Comp Cas 301 (Cal): AIR 1961 Cal 251.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-60, 9-63 Murlidhar Sodani v SEBI (2001) 105 Comp Cas 815 (MP).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37-7 Murshidabad Loan Office Ltd. v Satish Chandra Chakravarty (1943) 13 Comp Cas 159 (Cal): AIR 1943 Cal 440.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-54, 9-55 Musst Jhimi Bajoria v CIT (1970) 40 Comp Cas 780 (Cal): (1970) 1 Comp LJ 195 (Cal).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-12 Muthiah (A C) v Board of Control for Cricket in India 2011 AIR SCW 3770.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53-4 Mutter v. Eastern Midlands Rly. Co. (1888) 38 Ch D 92 (CA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28-6 Mysore Fruit Products Ltd v The Custodian [2005] 107 Bom LR 955 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-43 cxxi
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
N Jagan v Investment Trust of India Ltd [1996] 85 Comp Cas 75: [1996] 8 SCL 98 (Mad).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-62 N V R Nagappa Chettiar v. Madras Race Club (1949) 19 Comp Cas 175 (Mad): AIR 1951 Mad 831 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-112, 53-22 N. Nagendra Rao and Co. v. State of A.P. AIR 1994 SC 2663. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-6 N. Narayanan v Adjudging Officer, SEBI [2013] 178 Comp Cas 390 (SC). . . . . . . . . . 35-59 N.F.U. Development Trust Ltd., Re, [1972] 1W.L.R.1548. . . . . . . . . . . 14-166, 51-43, 53-17 Nabendu Dutta v. Arindam Mukherjee [2004] 121 Comp Cas 150 (Cal) . . . . . . . . . . . 61-17 Nagamma v. Veeranna Shivalingappa Konjalgi (1976) 3 SCC 736. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-217 Nahidco Housing (P) Limited v State 1993 (23) RLR 183: 1993 (25) DRJ 252. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-16 Nanalal Zaver v Bombay Life Assurance Co Ltd [1949] 19 Com Cas 26 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17-6, 14-89, 14-152, 55-65 Nanalal Zaver v Bombay Life Assurance Co Ltd 1950 SCR 391: [1950] 20 Comp Cas 179 (SC): AIR 1950 SC 172: 1950 SCJ 337. . . . 14-60, 14-90, 14-92, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-153, 14-169, 17-6, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17-11, 31-79 55-67 Nanavati & Co Pvt Ltd v Dutt (R C) (1975) 45 Comp Cas 91 (Bom). . . . . . . . . 31-38, 56-17 Nand Prasad v Arjun Prasad (1959) 29 Comp Cas 552 (Pat), AIR 1959 Pat 293.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52-24 Nandganj Sihori Sugar Co. Ltd. v Dixit (B N) AIR 1991 SCW 1280 . . . 46-36, 46-52, 48-48 Naraindas Lahoredas, Re, (1934) 4 Comp Cas 127 (Sind). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-20 Narandas Munmohandas Ramji v Indian Mfg Co Ltd (1953) 23 Comp Cas 335 (Bom): AIR 1953 Bom 433. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-32, 9-36, 9-45, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-112, 14-113, 20-10, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-29, 43-211 Narayanan (K N) v Income-tax Officer (1984) 55 Comp Cas 182 (Ker). . . . . . 21-65, 55-141 Narayanan Chettiar v Kaleeswarar Mills Ltd. [1951] 21 Comp. Cas. 351. . . . . . . . . . . . 52-7 Narayanlal Bansilal v Maneckji Petit Mfg Co Ltd [1931] 1 Comp Cas 377 (Bom), AIR 1931 Bom 354.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-12, 11-14 Naresh K Aggarwala Canbank Financial Services Ltd 2010 AIR SCW 3611 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-45, 6-8 Nash v Lynde (1929) AC 158. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-174 Nasiruddin v Sita Ram Agarwal (2003) 2 SCC 577. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-88 Nassau Phosphate Co., Re (1876) 2 Ch 610. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-4 Nathulal v State of M.P. AIR 1966 SC 43. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-118 National Bank Ltd, Re, (1966) 1 WLR 81.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-136 National Bank of Wales Ltd, Re, (1899) 2 Ch 629 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-22, 3-30, 26-10, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-62, 35-66, 35-68, 43-44
cxxii
Table of cases
National Cotton Mills Ltd. v Assistant Registrar (1984) 56 Comp Cas 222: (1984) 2 Comp LJ 272 (Cal). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-17 National Debentures Assets Corporation (1891) 2 Ch 505.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-4 National Dwellings Society v Sykes (1894) 3 Ch. 159 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-56, 50-69 National Exchange Company Limited, In re, 21 Ch D 519.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-29, 26-9 National Funds Assurance Co, In re (1878) 10 Ch D 118 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-22, 35-65 National Insurance Co. Ltd. v Glaxo India Ltd. (1999) 2 Comp LJ 205: (1999) 20 SCL 243 (Bom).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-101 National Provincial & Union Bank of England v Charnley [1924] 1 KB 431 (CA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-20, 57-22, 64-9 National Textile Workers’ Union v P.R. Ramkrishnan 1983 (1) SCR 922: 1983 (1) SCC 228: 1983 (53) Comp Cas 184: 1982 (2) Scale 1144: 1983 (1) LLN 229: 1983 (62) FJR 41: 1983 (1) LLJ 45: 1983 (1) Comp J1: AIR 1983 SC 75. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63-6 National Westminster Bank Plc and another v Inland Revenue Commissioners [1994] 3 All ER 1 (HL) (by majority decision) . . . . 9-48, 14-170, 18-15 Navnit Lal C Jhaveri v KK Sen, AAC (1965) 56 ITR 198 (SC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67-6 Nawab Major Sir Mohamed Akbar Khan v Attar Singh 38 Bom LR 739. . . . . . 44-46, 50-33 Nazir Ahmed v. King Emperor AIR 1936 PC 253. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-7 Nazir Hoosein v Darayus Bhathena 2000 (5) SCC 601:2000 AIR 2427 SC . . . . . . . . . 49-51 Ne Plus Technologies Pvt Ltd In re [2002] 112 Comp Cas 376; [2003] 52 CLA 13 (Mad) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-142 Needle Industries (India) Ltd. v Needle Industries Newey (India) Holding Ltd (1981) 3 SCC 333 : [1981] 51 Comp Cas 743: AIR 1981 SC 1298; 1981 SCR (3) 698 : (1982) 1 Comp LJ 1 (SC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-8, 6-5, 14-89, 14-91, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-92, 14-152, 14-156, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-184, 18-9, 43-31, 49-91, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53-19, 55-17, 55-39, 55-65, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-51, 55-68, 55-84, 55-114 Nell v Longbottom (1894) 1 QB 767. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-9, 51-32, 51-34 Nelson Motis v Union of India [1992] 4 SCC 711. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-84 NEPC Agro Foods Ltd v Nandagopal (2006) 70 CLA 229 (Mad). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-19 Nestle India Ltd., In re (2009) 147 Comp Cas 712 (Del). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37-9 Neville v Krikorian (2007) 1 BCLC 1 (CA).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-30 New British Iron Co, Exp Beckwith, Re, (1898) 1 Ch 324 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-4, 11-7, 11-18 New Bruncswick & Canada Railways & Land Co. v Muggeride [1860] 1 Directors’ report. & Sm. 363 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-138 New Bus Stand Shop Owners Association v. Corporation of Kozhikode 2009 AIR SCW 7580 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-37 cxxiii
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
New Chile Gold Mining Co In re. [1890] 45 Ch.D 598. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-15 New Chinese Antimony Co Ltd, Re, [1916] 2 Ch 115. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-29 New Citizen Bank of India v. Asian Assurance Co. Ltd. (1945) 15 Comp Cas 53 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-18 New Horizons Ltd. v Union of India (1995) 1 Comp LJ 100 (SC): (1997) 27 CLA 56 (SC): (1995) 1 SCC 478. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-14, 2-30, 29-6 New India Insurance Co. Ltd. v Shanti Misra AIR 1976 SC 237: 1975 (2) SCC 840: 1976 (2) SCR 266: 1976 ACJ 128. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-15 New India Sugar Mills Ltd v CST AIR 1963 SC 1207.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-31 New Monkhooshi Tea Co. Ltd, In re AIR 1967 Cal 196 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20-7, 20-11 Newborne v Sensolid (Great Britain) Ltd (1954) 1 QB 45: (1954) 24 Comp Cas 159 (CA).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29-6 Newman & Co., In re [1895] (64 L.J. Ch. 407; [1895] 1 Ch. 674. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-79 Newspaper Proprietary Syndicate, Re, (1900) 2 Ch 349.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-20 NFU Development Trust Ltd, Re, [1972] 1 WLR 1548. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40-10, 41-9 Nibro Ltd v National Insurance Co Ltd [1991] 70 Comp Cas 388: [1989] 3 Comp LJ 15 (Del) : AIR1991 Del 25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-31, 1-33, 43-186, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-188, 44-25, 49-25, 64-18 Nicholson v Rhodesia Trading Company (1897) 1 Ch 434. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-39 Nicol’s case (1885) 29 Ch D 247.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-127 Nihal Chand v Kharak Singh [1936] 6 Comp Cas 418 (Lah). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-34, 43-158 Nippon Yusen Kaisha v Ramjiben Serowgee AIR 1938 OC 152. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-41, 33-7 Nirad Amilal Mehta v Genelec Ltd. and Others (2009) 88 CLA 243 (Bom).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34-16, 34-20, 49-71 Niranjan Singh v Edward Ganj Public Welfare Association (1977) 47 Comp Cas 285 (P&H) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53-6 Nisbet v Shepherd (1994) 1 BCLC 300: (1995) 19 CLA 234 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-45 Nishad Patel and Another v State of Kerala and Others (1999) 96 Comp Cas 861 (Ker) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-151, 43-161 Non-Ferrous Rolling Mills Pvt Ltd. v Regional Director, Employees’ State Insurance Corp 1977 Lab IC 1706 (Mad).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-35 Norey v Keep [1901] 1 Ch. 561. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-183 Norman & Anor v Theodore Goddard & Ors (Quirk, third party) [1992] BCC 14; [1991] BCLC 1028 (ChD). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-129 Norman Hamilton v. Umedbhai S Patel [1979] 49 Comp Cas 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-42, 6-9 Normandy v Ind, Coope & Co [1908] 1 Ch 84. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-13, 11-14, 31-79, 31-80 North Cheshire & Manchester Brewery Co. Ltd. v Manchester Brewery Co. Ltd., (1899) AC 83. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-12 North Eastern Insurance Co, Re, [1919] 1 Ch 198. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-91 Northern Engineering Industries Plc, Re, (1994) 2 BCLC 704 (CA).. . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-145 cxxiv
Table of cases
Northern Projects Ltd. v Blue Coast Hotels and Resorts Ltd. [2007] 140 Comp Cas 300 (CLB). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-12, 48-7 North-West Transportation v Beatty [1887] 12 App Cas 589.. . . . . . . . . 9-20, 31-17, 43-20, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-25, 51-26, Notting Hill Trust v Roomus [2006] 1 WLR 1375 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62-14 Novopan India Ltd case (1997) 88 Comp Cas 596. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40-15 Nungambakkam Dhanarakshaka Saswatha Nidhi Ltd v Registrar (1972) 42 Comp Cas 632 (Mad). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-117 Nurcombe v. Nurcombe [1984] BCLC 557 at 562 ; [1985] 1 WLR 370 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34-10, 34-22, 34-27 NVR Nagappa Chettiar v The Madras Race Club (1949) 19 Comp Cas 175 (Mad). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-243, 53-24, 62-11, 65-11 O. P. Gupta v Shiv General Finance (P.) Ltd (1977) 47 Comp Cas 279 (Del). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58-4 O.P. Khaitan v Shree Keshariya Investment Ltd. [1978] 48 Comp Cas 85(Del). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-126 O’Neill v Phillips (1999) 2 All ER 961 (HL): (1999) BCC 600: (1999) 2 BCLC 1: (1999) 1 WLR 1092: (1999) 97 Comp Cas 807: (2000) 1 CLC 615.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-14, 55-37, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-107, 55-129 Oakes v Turquand (1867) LR 2 HL 325. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-5 Oakbank Oil Co v Crum (1883) 8 App Cas 65. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-4, 11-7, 11-18 Oberoi Hotels (India) Pvt Ltd v Observer Publications P Ltd . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-17 Ocean Coal Co. Ltd. v Powell Dubbryn Steam Coal Co. (1932) 2 Com Cas 454 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-49 Oceanic Steam Navigation Co, In re [1939] 9 Comp Cas 229 (Ch D). . . . . . . . . . 39-26, 41-6 OCL India Ltd In re [1999] 95 Comp Cas 429:[1999] 19 SCL 331. . . . . . 15-6, 15-14, 15-18 Official Liquidator of Karachi Bank v Shewram Dewanmal AIR 1933 Sindh 12: 33 Cr LJ 891: 140 IC 31: (1933) 3 Comp Cas 271.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-64 Official Liquidator v Sudarshan (T.) (2003) 116 Comp Cas 88 (Mad).. . . . . . . . 44-8, 44-40, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-62, 50-16 Official Liquidator, Golcha Properties P. Ltd. (In Liquidation) v Dhadda (P.C.) (1980) 50 Comp Cas 175 (Raj).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-7, 44-39, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-60, 50-16 Official Liquidator, Supreme Bank Ltd v P A Tendolkar [1973] 43 Comp Cas 383 (SC); AIR 1973 SC 1104. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-134 Official Receiver and Liquidator, Jubilee Cotton Mills Ltd. v Lewis (1924) AC 958 (HL). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-5 Old Silkstone Collieries Ltd, Re, (1954) 1 All ER 68 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-138 cxxv
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Om Prakash Berlia v Unit Trust of India (No. 1) (1983) 54 Comp Cas 136 (Bom): (1982) 3 Comp LJ 89 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . 50-150, 64-14 Om Prakash v Sree Keshariya Investments Ltd (1978) 48 Comp Cas 85 (Delhi). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-225 Om Prakash v Union of India 2012 AIR SCW 112.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-11 Omni-India Ltd v Balbir Singh [1989] 66 Comp Cas 903. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-148 Opera Photographic Ltd., Re, (1989) 1 WLR 634: 1989 BCC 601: (1989) 2 CLA 359 (Ch D). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-125, 50-90, 50-110 Organon (India) Ltd., In re [2010] 157 Comp Cas 287 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15-21 Osborne, Garett & Co v Abdulla AIR 1931 Sind 178. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-31 Osea Road Camp Sites Ltd In re [2005] 1 WLR 760 (CD) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-16, 55-133 Oxford Benefit Building and Investment Society Ltd, In re (1886) 35 Ch D 502 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-30, 35-63 Oxford Building Society (1887) 35 Ch D 509. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-8, 26-10, 35-67 Oxford Group v. l.R.C. [1949] 2 All E.R. 537. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-14 Oxford Legal Group Ltd v Sibbasbridge Services Ltd [2007] EWHC 2265 (Ch).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-177, 43-179 Oxford Legal Group Ltd v Sibbasbridge Services Ltd [2008] 2 BCLC 381;[2008] Bus LR 1245 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-181 Oxted Motor Co, Re, [1921] 3 KB 32 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-144 P Chockalingam v Deputy Commercial Tax Officer (1990) 68 Comp Cas 707 (AP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-151 P Mahamani v Tamil Nadu Magnesite Ltd [1994] 2 CLA 314 (Mad). . . . . . . . . 46-20, 46-39 P S Offshore Inter Land Services P Ltd v Bombay Suppliers& Services Ltd (1991) 5 CLA 376 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-133 P V Chandra v Malbar and Pioneer Hoisery Pvt Ltd (1988) 2 Com LJ 146 (Ker) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-7, 11-32 P. Ganeshwar Rao v. State of A.P.AIR 1988 SC 2068 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-4 P. Rajan Rao v B. G. Somayaji [1995] 83 Comp Cas 662 (SC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-62 P. S. Nanawati v Jaipur Metals & Electricals Ltd. [1990] 69 Comp Cas 769 (Raj). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-149 P. Sridevi v Cherishma Housing Pvt Ltd 2009 CLC 358. . . . . . 55-43, 55-98, 55-99, 55-100 P. Stanwill and Co. v Commissioner of Income Tax (1952) 22 ITR 316 (All).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-19, 30-20, 30-34 P. V. Narsimha Rao v. State (CBI/SPE) AIR 1998 SC 2120. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-52 Padmasundara Rao v State of Tamil Nadu AIR 2002 SC 1334 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-162 Palanjappa v. Pasupati Bank (1942) I Mad LJ 425. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-4 Paper Products Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise [1999] 7 SCC 84; 2007 AIR SCW 4775. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67-7
cxxvi
Table of cases
Paradise Motor Co Ltd, In re (1968) 1 WLR 1125: (1968) 2 All ER 625: (1968) 38 Comp Cas 863: (1968) 2 Comp LJ 216 (CA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-45 Parameshwari (S.) v Kamadhenu Metal Rolling Mills Pvt Ltd (1970) 2 Comp LJ 120 (Mad): AIR 1971 Mad 293.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-39, 9-55 Parashuram Dattaram Shamdasani v Tata Industrial Bank Ltd AIR 1925 Bom 49. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-86 Parekh Engineering & Body Building Co Ltd, Re, (1975) 45 Comp Cas 157 (Pat). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-244, 51-9, 51-10 Parker and Cooper Ltd. v Reading (1926) Ch 975 (Ch D). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-144, 60-16 Parkyns v. Preist (1881) 7 Q.B.D. 313. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63-4 Parmanand Choudhary v Smt. Shukla Devi Mishra (1990) 67 Comp. Cas. 45 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66-8 Parmeshwari Prasad Gupta v Union of India (2003) 4 SCC 239. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-197 Parmeshwari Prasad Gupta v Union of India [1974] 44 Comp Cas 1 (SC), AIR 1973 SC 2389, (1973) 2 SCC 543.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-19, 49-3, 60-14, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-191, 43-197, 43-200 Pasari Flour Mills Ltd. v. Vidisha AIR 1961 M.P. 340. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-100, 50-130 Patel Roadways Ltd. v Prasad Trading Co. [1992] 74 Comp Cas 11 (SC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68-9 Pathasarathy (N) v Controller of Capital Issues AIR 1991 SC 1420: (1991) 72 Comp Cas 651 (SC): (1991) 2 Comp LJ 1 (SC).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-35, 31-97 Patrick, Hillhead and Maryhill Gas Co v Taylor (1888) 15 R 711. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-42 Paulger v Butland (1989) 3 NZLR 549. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-109, 43-169 Paulin , Re, (1935) 5 Comp Cas 116 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-105 Pavlides v Jensell (1956) 3 WLR 224.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34-25 Pavlides v Jensen (1956) Ch. 565. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34-21 Pearce Duff & Co. Ltd., Re, [1960] 3 All ER 222, [1960] 1 WLR 1014 : (1961) 31 Com. Cas 251 (reduction of capital) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-145 Pedley v Inland Waterways Association Ltd. [1977] 1 All ER 209 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-75 Peek v Gurney (1873) LR 6 HL 377. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-24 Peek v. Gurney [1874] LR 6 (HD). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-139 Peel’s case (1867) 2 Ch App 674: (1867) LR 2 Ch 674.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-5 Peerless General Finance & Investment Co Ltd v Poddar Projects Ltd (2007) 71 Corporate Courier 254 (Cal) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-53 Peerless General Finance and Investment Co. Ltd., and another, Petitioners v. Reserve Bank of India AIR 1992 SC 1033. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67-3 Pender v Lushington (1877) 6 Ch D 70; ED Sasoon and Cov Patch (1922) 45 Bom LR 46. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-20, 31-17, 34-7, 34-13, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34-14, 34-19, 49-74, 51-7, 51-25 cxxvii
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Peninsular Life Assurance Co, Re, AIR 1936 Lah 226. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-41, 49-5, 64-14 Peninsular Life Assurance Co., Re, AIR 1936 Bom 24: (1936) 6 Comp Cas 32 (Bom).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-69, 64-15 Pennwalt India Ltd v Registrar of Companies (1987) 62 Comp Cas 112 (Bom): (1986) 2 Comp LJ 208 (Bom).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-32 People Insurance Co Ltd v C R E Wood and Co Ltd (1961) 31 Comp Cas 61 (Punj). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-100, 21-42 Pepper v Hart [1993] 1 All ER 42. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-7 Performing Right Society Ltd v Ciryl Theatrical Syndicate, Ltd [1924] 1 KB 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-51 Perkins, ex parte Mexican Santa Barbara Mining Co, Re, (1890) 24 QBD 613.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-54 Petroleum and Natural Gas Regulatory Board v Indraprastha Gas Limited AIR 2015 SC 2978 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-188, 43-66 Phaltan Sugar Works Ltd v Mansingrao Dhondiram Kadam (1977) 83 CrLJ 2021. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-13 Pharmaceutical Society v London & Provincial Supply Association (1880) 5 AC 857. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-12, 1-13, 35-38 Phillips vs. Eyre [1870] LR 6 QB 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-12 Phoenix Bessemer Steel Co. (1875) 44 LJ Ch. 683: 32 LT 854. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-23 Phoenix Office Supplies Ltd v Larvin (2003) BCC 11 (CA): (2002) 2 BCLC 556 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-31, 55-108 Picksonic Electronics (P.) Ltd v Indira Singh (1998) 15 SCL 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-50 Piercy v S Mills & Co (supra). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-92, 55-68 Pinaki Das Gupta v Maadhyam Advertising (P.) Ltd. (2002) 49 CLA 9: (2002) 4 Comp LJ 318: (2002) 38 SCL 170 (CLB): (2003) 114 Comp Cas 346 (CLB).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58-5 Pinner v Everett [1969] 3 All ER 257 (HL), per Lord Reid... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-132 Pino Bisazza Glass Pvt. Ltd. v. Bisazza India Ltd. [2003] 114 Comp Cas 165 (Guj). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-7 Pioneer Motors Pvt Ltd v Municipal Council, Nagercoil AIR 1967 SC 684. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53-4, 62-10, 65-11 Pioneer Mutual Benefit and Friend-in-Need Society Ltd v Assistant Registrar (1933) 3 Comp Cas 37 (Mad): AIR 133 Mad 129 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-20 Pioneer Protective Glass Fibre Ltd. v Fibre Glass Pilkington Ltd. [1986] 60 Comp Cas 707 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13-8 PMP Auto Industries Ltd In re [1994] 80 Comp Cas 289: [1992] 7 CLA 94 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-4, 39-47, 40-6, 39-19, Â . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-21, 40-15, 41-6 Poatel v IRC (1971) 2 All ER 504.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-11
cxxviii
Table of cases
Ponnwalt India Ltd v Registrar [1987] 62 Comp Cas 112 (Bom): (1986) 2 Comp LJ 208 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24-7, 44-46 Pooja Ravinder Devidasani v. State of Maharashtra (2014) 16 SCC 1 . . . . . . 35-170, 35-181 Portal v Emmense (1875) 1 CPD 201. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-41, 64-15 Portuguese Consolidated Copper Mines Ltd, Re, (1889) 42 Ch D 160, .35-208, 43-135, 43-191, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-194, 43-197, 44-27, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60-7, 60-8, 60-11, 60-24 Postage & Denby (Agencies) Ltd, Re, (1986) 2 BCC: [1987] BCLC 8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-20, 51-7, 51-26, 55-42, 55-56 Pothen v Hindustan Trading Corpn P Ltd. (1967) 37 Comp Cas 266 (Ker): (1966) 2 Comp LJ 252.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-60 Prabhu Dayal Chitlangia v Trinity Combine Associates Pvt Ltd [1999] 4 Comp LJ 514 (CLB). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-3 Prabhudas Damodar Kotecha v. Manhabala Jeram Damoda AIR 2013 SC 2959. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24-9 Pradip Kumar Banerjee v Union of India 2000 CLC 2207 (Cal). . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-21, 49-90 Pradip Kumar Ghatak v Asansol Club Ltd [2012] 113 SCL. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-138 Pradip Nanjee Gala v Sales Tax Officer 2015 AIR SCW 3357 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67-4 Prafulla Kumar Raut v Oriental Engg Works P Ltd (1986) 60 Comp Cas 65 (Ori). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-17 Pragji v. Pranjiwan 5 Bom LR 878. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69-6 Prakash Roadlines Ltd. v Prakash Parcel Service Pvt. Ltd., 1992 (2) Delhi Lawyers 17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-7, 12-14 Prakash Timbers Pvt. Ltd v. Smt. Sushma Shingla AIR 1995 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-118 Pramatha Nath Sanyal v. Kali Kumar Dutt AIR 1925 Cal 714-715. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-141 Pratap Singh v Shri Krishna Gupta AIR 1956 SC 140. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-26 Pratibha Chemicals Ltd v Commissioner of Central Excise 1999 (106) ELT 119 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-23 Pravinbhai Ganeshbhai Chaudhary v Neutral Glass and Allied Industries Pvt Ltd [2001] 99 FJR 536 (Guj). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-238 Prayan Prasad v Gaya Bank & Trades Association Ltd. (1931) 1 Comp Cas 85 (Pat): AIR 1931 Pat 44.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-15, 51-39 Precision Dippings Marketing Ltd and Others, Re, [1985] BCLC 385:[1985] 1 BCC 99,539.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-18 Prefontein v Grenier (1907) AC 101 (PC).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-30, 35-68 Prem Seth v National Industrial Corpn. Ltd (1994) 3 Comp LJ 205 (Del) . . . . 14-94, 14-157 Premila Devi v. People’s Bank AIR 1933 PC 284 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-15 Premlata Bhatia v Union of India (2004) 58 CLA 217 (Del). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-6 Prerna Premises Pvt Ltd’s (1992) 9 CLA 171. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-33
cxxix
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Presanna Venkatesa Rao v The Trichinopoly District Cooperative Central Bank Ltd [1940] 10 Comp Cas 196 (Mad) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-205, 60-22 Prest v Prest [2013] 3 WLR 1 (SC): [2013] 4 ALL ER 673 (SC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-22, 7-9 Price Waterhouse Coopers Pvt Ltd v CIT, Kolkata 2013 AIR SCW 5444. . . . . . . . . . . 43-26 Princl. Chief Conservator of Forest v J. K. Johnson (2011) 10 SCC 794 SC. . . . . . . . . 48-10 Priyachandrakumar (CR) v Purasawalkam Permanent Fund Ltd (1996) 7 SCL 61 (Mad): (1995) 83 Comp Cas 150 (Mad): (1995) 3 Comp LJ 284 (Mad): (1995) 17 CLA 401 (Mad).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-22 Progress Property Company Limited (Appellant) v Moorgarth Group Limited (2010) UKSC 55.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-17, 14-70 Progress Property Company Limited (Appellant) v Moorgarth Group Limited [2010] 1 BCLC 1 (CA).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-17, 35-61 Progress Property Company Limited (Appellant) v Moorgarth Group Limited [2011] 2 BCLC 332 (SC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-58, 35-61 Progress Property Company Limited v Moorgarth Group Limited [2011] 1 WLR 1; [2011] Bus LR 260; [2011] 2 All ER 432 (SC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-17 Property Company Limited v Moorgarth Group Limited (2010) UKSC 55. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-18 Prudential Assurance Co. Ltd v Newman Industries Limited (No.2) (1982) 2 Ch. 204. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34-11, 34-15 PS Bedi v Registrar of Companies [1986] Comp Cas 1061 (Del). . . . . . . . . . . . 35-26, 67-10 Public Passenger Service Ltd v MA Khadar AIR 1966 SC 489; [1966] 36 Comp Cas 1 (SC); 1966 AIR 489, 1966 SCR (1) 683. . . . . . . . . . . 9-13, 55-72 Public Prosecutor v TP Khaitan (1957) 27 Comp Cas 77 (Mad).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-31 Puddephat v Leith (1916) 1 Ch 200. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-20, 31-17, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-7, 51-25 Pugh v. Duke of Leeds 2 Cowp. 714.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62-9 Punalur Paper Mi/ls Ltd. v District Collector, Quilon [1985] 60 STC 193. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-150, 43-161 Punjab Agro Industries Corporation Limited v. Superior Genetics (India) Ltd. and others [2001] 108 Comp Cas 349 (CLB). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63-4 Punjab Industrial Bank Ltd. v Byramji Hormusji Parsi (1934) 4 Comp Cas 345 (Lah): AIR 1935 Lah 157 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-13 Punjab National Bank Ltd. v Union of India (1975) 45 Comp Cas 408 (Del). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-11 Punt v Symons & Co (1903) 2 Ch 506; Piercy v S Mills & Co (1920) 1 Ch 77 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-90, 14-153, 55-66 Purbanchal Cables & Conductors P. Ltd v Assam State Electricity Board (2012) 7 SCC SC 462; AIR 2012 SC 3167 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-7 Purna Investment Ltd. v Bank of India (1984) 55 Comp Cas 737 (Cal) . . . . . . . . . 1-20, 3-16
cxxx
Table of cases
Purna Investments Ltd v Southern Steemlmet & Alloys Ltd [1977] 47 Comp Cas 752 (Kar).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-62 Purt v Symons & Co (supra). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-91, 14-154 PV Chandra v Malbar and Pioneer Hoisery Pvt Ltd (1988) 2 Com LJ 146 (Ker) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-5 Pyare Lal Gupta v D P Agarwal [1983] 53 Comp Cas 586 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-9 Pydah Venkatachalapati v Guntur Cotton, Jute & Paper Mills Co Ltd AIR 1929 Mad 353. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-25, 43-49 Pyle Works, Re, (No. 2) (1891) 1 Ch 173. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-17 Qazi Noorul v Dy Director, ESI Corporation 2009 AIR SCW 5490.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-132 Quarry Owners Association v State of Bihar 2000 AIR SCW 3015. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63-3 Queensway Systems Limited v Walker (2007) 2 BCLC 577 (Ch D). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-30 Quin & Axtens Ltd. v Salmon (1909) AC 442.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-62 R Banerjee v H D Dubey [1992] 8 CLA 69. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-175, 35-185, 35-216 R C Cooper v Union of India (1970) 40 Comp Cas 325 (SC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-15, 14-133 R K Khandelwal v State [1965] 2 Cri LJ 439 (All) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-210 R Mathalone v Bombay Life Assurance Co Ltd (1954) 24 Comp Cas 1 (ASC). . . . . . . . 55-142 R N Jalan v Deccan Enterprises P Ltd (1992) 75 Comp Cas 417 (AP). . . . . . 14-153, 14-90, Â . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-66 R v Adomako (1994) 3 All ER 79.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-85 R v Andrews Weatherfoil Ltd. (1972) 1 All ER 65: (1972) 1 WLR 118 . . . . . . . . . . 2-41, 8-7 R v Bradford Metropolitan City Council (1989) 3 All ER 156 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-32 R v Christopher McQuoid [2009] EWCA Crim 1301 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-168, 35-178 R v Findlater (1940) 10 Comp Cas 149 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23-7 R v H M Coroner, ex p Spooner (1987) 88 Cr App R 10 at 16.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-85 R v Inhabitants of Andersen (1846) 9 QB 665 at 668. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-8 R v Ipswich Union (1877), 2 QBD 269 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-4, 61-5 R v P & O European Ferries (Dover) Ltd (1990) 93 Cr App R 72 at 84.. . . . . . . . . . . . 35-86 R v Registrar of Companies, ex parte Attorney General (1991) BCLC 476 (QBD). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-21 R v Registrar of Joint Stock Companies, Ex parte More (1931) 2 KB 197: (1932) 2 Comp Cas 99 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-21 R v Turner (1910) 1 KB 346. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53-5 R v Whitechapel [1848] LR 1 P&M 229 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-5 R Venkataswami v South India Viscose Ltd [1986] 2 Comp LJ 49 (Mad).. . . . . . . . . . 50-63 R. Babu v TTK LIG Ltd. [2005] 124 Com Cas 109 (Mad) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69-7 R. Gac Electrodes Ltd. & Another v Union of India & others, (1982) 52 Comp Cas 288 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-14, 30-30 R. Kalyani v. Janak C. Mehta 2009 AIR SCW 1836 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-78 cxxxi
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
R. Mathalone v Bombay Life Assurance Co. Ltd. [1954] 24 Comp. Cas. 1 (SC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-4 R. Prakasam v Sree Narayana Dharma Paripalana Yogam (1980) 50 Comp Cas 611 (Ker). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-116, 50-117 R. Rajagopal Reddy v. Padmini Chandrasekharan AIR 1996 SC 238. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-17 R. Rangachari v S. Suppiah (1975) 45 Comp Cas 641 (SC) . . . . . . . 50-105, 50-116, 50-135 R. Subba Naidu v. Commissioner of Gift Tax (1969) 39 Comp Cas 766 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-29 R. v Boal (1992) BCLC 872 (CA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47-8 R. v ICR Haulage Ltd, [1944] 1 All ER 691: [1945] 15 Comp Cas 47.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-93 R. v Kylsant [1932] 2 Comp Cas 225 (CCA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-140 R. v Mayor of Wigan (1885) 14 QBD 908; Glossop v Glossop (1907) 2 Ch 370 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-40 R. v Registrar of Companies, ex-parte Esal (Commodities) Ltd. [1985] 1 BCC 99, 50 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57-21, 64-7 R. Vasinathan and others v. Commercial Tax Officer(FAC), Ambattur Assessment circle, Villiwakkam, Chennai and another [2010] 153 Comp Cas 174(Mad) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-150 R.M. Seshadri v Second Addl. ITO (1954) 25 ITR 400 (Mad.). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-247 R.V. Gaborian (1809) 11 East 77 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-56, 50-69 Rabindra Chamaria v Registrar of Companies [1992] 73 Comp Cas 257 (SC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-127 Rabindra Kumar Nayakv Collector, Mayurbhanj (1999) 2 SCC 627 para 11: AIR 1999 SC 1120.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-52, 38-5 Rabindra Nath Mitra v Emperor (1938) 8 Comp Cas 176 (Cal). . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-28, 43-31 Radcliffe v Bartholomen (1892) 1 QB 161. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62-6, 65-19, 65-21 Radha Raman Samantha v Bank of India (2004) 1 SCC 605. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-30 Radhakrishnan Chettiar (T) v Official Liquidator, Madras Peoples’ Bank Ltd. [1943] 13 Comp Cas 21 (Mad). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23-10 Radhey Shyam Gupta v Kamal Oil and Allied Industries Ltd. (2001) 103 Comp Cas 337 (Del).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-14 Radhey Shyam Khemkav. State of Bihar 1993 AIR SCW 2427 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-73 Radiant Chemical Co Ltd In re [1943] 13 Comp Cas 186 (Pat). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13-9 Raghu Laxminarayan v Fine Tubes AIR 2007 SC 1634. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-69 Raghunandan Neotia v Swadeshi Cloth Dealers Ltd (1964) 34 Comp Cas 570 (Cal). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-38 Raghunath Rai Bareja v Punjab National Bank (2007) 2 SCC 230.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-88 Rahman v Malik [2008] 2 BCLC 403 (Ch D).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-102
cxxxii
Table of cases
Railway Sleepers Supply Co, Re, (1885) 29 Ch D 204 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-112,, 53-5, 53-22, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62-8, 62-10, 62-11, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-9, 65-10, 65-11 Rainham Chemical Works Ltd (in liq.) v Belvedere Fish Guano Co.Ltd. [1921] 2 AC 465. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-51 Raizada Bros. (P) Limited v Lt. Governor 1997 (42) DRJ 47. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-16 Raj Kumar Yadav v Samir Kumar Yadav 2005 AIR SCW 1647 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62-8, 65-8 Raj Pal Singh v State of UP [1968] 1 Comp LJ 21 (All).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-51 Raja Gowl Rajasimha Rao v State of A P AIR 1973 AP 236. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15-6, 15-13 Raja Ram Jaiswal v Ganesh Prasad, AIR 1959 All 29].. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-164 Rajahmundry Electric Supply Corporation Ltd. v. A Nageswara Rao and Others [1956] 26 Comp Cas 55 (AP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-21 Rajakumar (S S) v Perfect Castings Pvt Ltd. (1968) 38 Comp Cas 187 (Mad): (1968) 1 Comp LJ 41.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-18 Rajan Nagindas Doshi v British Burma Petroleum Co Ltd (1972) 42 Comp Cas 197 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-124 Rajendra Kumar Tekriwal v Unique Construction Pvt Ltd 2008 CLC 639 (CLB). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58-7 Rajendra Prasad Oil Mills v Chunni Devi (1969) 39 Comp Cas 193 (All)(FB): 1968 (2) Comp LJ 137. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-25 Rajghria Paper Mills Ltd v General Manager, Indian Security Press 2000 CLC 1438. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-35, 44-28 Ram Autar Jalan v Coal Products Pvt Ltd (1970) 40 Comp Cas 715 (SC).. . . . . . . . . . 64-18 Ram Baran Singh v Muffassil Bank Ltd AIR 1925 All 206. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-94 Ram Chander Talwar v Devender Kumar Talwar [2010] 159 Comp Cas 646 (SC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-36, 14-44 Ram Chandra Singh v. Savitri Devi [2003] 8 SCC 319. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-10 Ram Govind Mishra v Allahabad Theatres P Ltd (1989) 66 Comp Cas 358 (All). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-33, 14-119, 20-11, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20-15, 21-32 Ram Janki Devi v Juggilal Kamlapat AIR 1971 SC 2551: (1971) 1 SCC 477. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24-7, 44-46, 50-32 Ram Kania v Matheuson (1915) 42 IA 97: 19 CWN 585: ILR 42 Cal 1029. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-16 Ram Nandan Sigh v Ramadhar Singh AIR 1966 Pat 297 (FB) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-18 Ram Parshotam Mittal v Hillcrest Realty SDN. BHD. [2010] 152 Comp Cas 477 (SC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-16 Ram Prashad v CIT (1972) 42 Comp Cas 545: (1972) 86 ITR 122 (SC): (1972) 2 SCC 696.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-31, 46-32, 46-33
cxxxiii
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Ram Purshotam Mittal v Hillcrest Realty SDN. BHD. [2009] 152 Comp Cas 477 (SC):AIR 2009 SC 2859. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13-10, 51-10 Ram Ratan Gupta v Director of Enforcement AIR 1966 SC 495: (1966) 36 Comp Cas 49 (SC).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-46, 50-33 Rama Sundari Ray v Syamendra Lal Ray (1947) ILR 2 Cal 1.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-4 Ramaben A Thanawala v Jyoti Ltd (1957) 27 Comp Cas 105 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-109, 43-115, 46-44, 48-6 Ramacast Ltd v Assistant Registrar of Companies (1988) 63 Comp Cas 805 (Calcutta). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-9 Ramachandra Bail (M) v Kanniah (MR) (1966) 36 Comp Cas 158 (Mad). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-22 Ramachandran v State of Kerala (1984) 55 Comp Cas 590: (1984) 55 STC 209 (Ker). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-45, 35-35, 43-150, 43-161 Raman (U. C) v P.T.A. Rahim 2014 AIR SCW 4673. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-52 Ramappa v Sangappa AIR 1958 SC 937 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38-10 Ramballav Dhandhania v Gangadhar Nathmall AIR 1956 Cal. 275 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-33, 14-44 Ramdas v Cotton Ginning Co (1887) ILR 9 All 366.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-41, 64-15 Ramji Lal Baisiwala v Baiton Cables Co Ltd (1964) ILR 14 Raj 135. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-12, 51-32 Ramkishore (D) v Vijayawada Share Brokers Ltd (2007) 140 Comp Cas 180 (CLB): (2007) 77 CLA 194 (CLB): (2004) 58 CLA 162 (CLB). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-125, 64-23 Ramkissendas v Satya Charan (1946) 50 CWN 310.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-6 Ramkrishna Industries Pvt Ltd v PR Ramakrishnan (1988) 64 Comp Cas 425 (Mad). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-7, 11-4, 11-18, 11-32 Ramnugger Cane & Sugar Co. Ltd. v Assistant Registrar (1990) 3 CLA 180 (Cal).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-17 Rampur Distillary and Chemical Co. Ltd. v. Company Law Board (1970) 40 Comp Cas 916 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56-11 Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd v Dr Jayram Chigurupati 2010 CLC 262 (CLB). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-7, 43-119, 43-123 Rance’s case (1870) 6 Ch App 104. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-8, 35-68 Rangakala Investments Ltd. In Re. (1995) 16 CLA 280 (Guj). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-24 Rangaraj (V B) v Gopalakrishnan (V B) (1991) 6 CLA 211 (SC): (1992) 73 Comp Cas 201: (1992) 1 Comp LJ 11: AIR 1992 SC 453. . . . . . 11-34, 14-53, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-33, 14-48 Rangoon Electric Tramway and Supply Co. v King-Emperor ILR (1933) 11 Rang 162. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-16 Rank Industries Ltd v Registrar of Companies, A.P. (2007) 135 Comp Cas 601 (AP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-56 cxxxiv
Table of cases
Rao v Registrar of Companies (1947) 47 Comp Cas 641 (Mad). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-20 Rasheed Khan v Mohd. Ayyub Kashim 2014 (4) ABR 310. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-37 Rashmi Seth v Tillsoil Farms Pvt Ltd (1995) 82 Comp Cas 409 (CLB).. . . . . . . . . . . . 64-20 Rasila S. Mehta v Custodian, Nariman Bhavan 2011 AIR SCW 3002,. . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-10 Ratners Group Plc., Re, [1988] BCLC 685;(1988) 4 BCC 293. . . . . . . . . 15-5, 15-7, 15-13, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15-15, 15-27, 37-11, 40-20 Rattan Industries Ltd v Additional Commissioner, Trade Tax [2006] 148 STC 111 (All). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67-7 Rattan Singh v Managing Director, Moga Transport Co Ltd [1959] 29 Comp Cas 165 (Punj): AIR 1959 Punj 196.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-174, 14-177 Ravanna Subanna v Kaggeerappa (G. S) AIR 1954 SC 653.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-54, 38-7 Ravi Raj Gupta v Hans Raj Gupta & Co (P) Ltd [2010] 94 CLA I (Del). . . . . . . . . . . . 43-47 Ravinder Kumar Jain v Punjab Registered (Iron & Steel) Stockholders Association Ltd (1978) 48 Comp Cas 401 (P&H).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53-6 Ravinder Kumar Sangal v Auto Lamps Ltd (1984) 1 Comp LJ 59 . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-4, 31-58 Ravindra Narayan, Director, Pratap Rajasthan Copper foils & Laminates Ltd. v Registrar of Companies [1994] 14 CLA 323 (Raj) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-24, 35-228 Ravindra Savla v Avitel Post Studioz Ltd AIR 2016 P&H 218 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-74 Ray v Union of India (1989) 65 Comp Cas 196: (1988) 3 Comp LJ 259 (Del). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-22 Rayfield v Hands & Others (1958) 28 Comp Cas 460 (Ch D). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-5, 14-136 Rebello (F.A.C.) v Co-operative Navigation & Trading Co Ltd AIR 1925 Bom 105: 26 Bom LR 907.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-17 Reckitt Benckiser (India) Ltd., In re [2011] 167 Comp Cas 541 (Del) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15-22 Reese River Silver Mining Co v Smith (1869) LR 4 HL 64.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-41, 64-15 Regal (Hastings) Ltd v Gulliver [1942] 1 All ER 378 (HL). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60-19, 43-203 Regina v Lehair [2015] 1 WLR 4811 (CA. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62-13 Regional Director, Employees’ State Insurance Corporation v High Land Coffee Works of P.F.X. Saldanha & Sons 1991 (3) SCR 307: AIR 1992 SC 129: 1991 (3) SCC 617: 1991 (2) Scale 221: 1991 (3) JT 325.. . . . . 32-20 Regional Director, Employees’ State Insurance Corporation v High Land Coffee Works of P.F.X. Saldanha & Sons AIR 1992 SC 129. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-62 Regional Executive, Kerala Fisherman’s Welfare Fund Board v Fancy Food AIR 1995 SC 1620: 1995 (4) SCC 341: 1995 (3) Scale 273: 1995 (4) JT 394.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-132 Registrar of Companies v Bihar Investment Trust Ltd (1978) 48 Comp Cas 579 (Pat). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-39, 43-52, 43-128 Registrar of Companies v Orissa Paper Products Ltd (1988) 63 Comp Cas 460: (1986) 2 Comp LJ 213 (Orissa). . . . . . . . . . . . 35-146, 43-41, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-53, 43-129 cxxxv
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Registrar of Restrictive Trading Agreements v WH Smith & Son Ltd. [1969] 3 All ER 1065 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47-7 Registrar v Orissa Paper Products Ltd. (1988) 63 Comp Cas 460 (Ori). . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-17 Reliance Petroleum Ltd. In Re. (2003) 54 CLA 149: (2003) 46 SCL 38 (Guj) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41-8 Renuka Ramnath v Yes Bank Ltd [2012] 174 Comp Cas 465 (Mad). . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-146 Reserve Bank of India v. Peerless General Finance and Investment Co Ltd [1987] 61 Comp Cas 663 (SC).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-73 Reshma Estates P Ltd In re (1977) 47 Comp Cas 447. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57-5 Resinoid & Mica Products Ltd In re (1982) 3 All ER 677. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57-4, 57-11 Rex v ICR Haulage Ltd (1944) 1 All ER 691: (1945) 15 Comp Cas 47.. . . . . . . . . . . 35-121 Rex v. I. C. R. Haulage Ltd. [1944] 1 KB 551, 554. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-82 Rex v. Turner [1910] 1 K. B. 346. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53-5, 62-11, 65-12 Richardson v Blackmore [2006] BCC 276 (CA); [2005] EWCA Civ 1356. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-74 Richardson v. Robertson (1862) 6 LT75. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-46 Ridge Securities Ltd v Inland Revenue Commissioners [1964[ 1 WLR 479;[1964] 1 All ER 275 (ChD). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-18, 35-62 Rights & Issues Investment Trust Ltd v Stylo Shoes Ltd (1964) 3 WLR 1077;[1964] 3 All ER 628;(1965) 35 Comp Cas 102.. . . . . . . . . . . 51-41 Rivera Watch Corp., Ex Parte, 106 U.S.P.Q. 145. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-22 Robert Alan Hill v Permanent Trustee Company of New South Wales Ltd, Re, [1931] 1 Comp Cas 1 (PC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-71 Roberts & Cooper Ltd, Re, [1929] 2 Ch 383. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-34, 51-11, 51-14 Roberts and Cooper Ltd In re [1929] 2 Ch 383 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-55, 26-67 Roberts Stephen Holdings Ltd. , Re, [1968] 1 All ER 197. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15-7, 15-19 Rohtas Industries Ltd. v. S.D. Agarwal (1969) 30 Comp Cas 781. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56-8 Rolling Stock Co of Ireland Re, (1866) 1 Ch 567 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-121 Rose v. Inland Revenue Commissioner[1952] 1 All E R 1217. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-27 Roshan Sam Joyce v S. R. Cotton Mills Ltd AIR 1990 SC 1881. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-145 Rossell Industries Ltd. (1995) 6 SCL 79:(1995) 19 CLA 196: (1995) 4 Comp LJ (Cal). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27-6, 39-8, 39-28, 39-32 Roussell v Burnham (1909) 1 Ch 127. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18-7, 14-125 Roy (A. K) v Voltas Limited AIR 1973 SC 225. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-27, 31-28 Royal British Bank v Turquand (1856) 6 E&B 327. . . . . . . . . . . . 21-51, 21-52, 43-89, 59-5 Royal Exchange Assurance Corporation v Walker, In re, (1935) 5 Comp Cas 412 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41-11 Royal Indus. Ltd. v. Kraft Foods, Inc., 926 F. Supp. 407, 412 (S.D.N.Y. 1996) . . . . 2-39, 8-6 RS Livemedia P. Ltd [2014] 127 Comp Cas 1 (Del) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15-14, 15-22 Rubin Bros. Footwear, Inc. v. Chem. Bank, 119 B.R. 416, 422 (S.D.N.Y. 1990) . . . 2-40, 8-6 cxxxvi
Table of cases
Ruby Mills Ltd v Union of India (1985) 57 Comp Cas 193 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . 30-15, 30-16, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-31, 31-57, 38-15 Runciman v Walter Runciman Plc (1992) BCLC 1084 (QBD): [1993] BCC 223 (QB) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-28, 43-31, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-51, 43-141, 49-41, 49-47 Russel v Northern Bank Development Corporation Ltd (1992) 3 All E R 161:(1992) BCLC 101: (1993) 3 Comp L J 45:(1992) 9 CLA 59. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-27, 11-37, 14-50 Russell v Wakefield Waterworks (1875) LR 20 Eq. 474 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34-24, 35-63 Rustom Cavasjee Cooper v Union of India [1970] 40 Comp Cas 325 (SC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-22, 22-5, 35-33 Ruttonjee & Co Ltd, Re, (1970) 40 Comp Cas 491 (Cal). . . . . . . . . . 50-90, 50-105, 50-109, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-135 S R Dutta and Another v Bhola Nath Paper House Ltd (1983) 53 Comp Cas 883 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-7 S Sundersan v Plast-O-Fibre Industries Pvt Ltd [1993] 76 Comp Cas 38 (Mad). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-100 S Varadarajan v Venketeswara Solvent Extractions P Ltd [1992] 9 CLA 39, [1994] 80 Comp Cas 693, (1995) 4 Comp LJ 287 (Mad). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-66 S. C. Cambatta v Commissioner of Income Tax [1952] 21 ITR 121 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19-7 S. K. Alagh v. State of U. P. AIR 2008 SC 1731. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-78 S. Narayanappa v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bangalore AIR 1967 SC 523. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-7 S. P. Changalvaraya Naidu v. Jagannath AIR 1994 SC 853; [1994] 1 SCC 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-10 S. P. Gupta v Packwell Manufacturers (Delhi) Pvt. Ltd [2015] 189 Comp Cas 586 (Delhi). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-22 S. P. Mittal v Union of India (1983) 1 SCC 51. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-8 S. S. Dhanoa, Appellant V. Municipal Corporation, Delhi (1981) 3 SCC 431 (SC): AIR 1981 SC 1395 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-7 S.K. Sinha, Chief Enforcement Officer v Videocon International Ltd. (2008) 2 SCC 492:2008 AIR SCW 1203 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-12 Sabitha Ramamurthy v R.B.S. Channabasavaradhya (2006) 10 SCC 581. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-78 Sadiq Hasan (S) v Mumtaz Bank Ltd. AIR 1929 Lah 656. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-33, 31-94 Sadler v Whiteman (1910) 1 KB 868. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-24, 9-25, 27-11, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27-12
cxxxvii
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Ltd. and others v. Securities and Exchange Board of India and another [2012] 174 Comp Cas 154 (SC). . . . . . 14-167, 18-10 Sahayanidhi (Virudhunagar) Ltd v Subrahmanya Nadar (ARS) (1950) 20 Comp Cas 214 (Mad). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-52 Sahib Singh AIR 1965 SC 1451: (1965) 2 Cri LJ 434 (SC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-11 Sahni Silk Mills P. Ltd. v. Employees’ State Insurance Corporation [1994] 5 SCC 346. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-36 Sailendra Kumar Ray v The Bank of Calcutta Ltd (1940) 18 Comp Cas 1 (Cal).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-52 Saketh India Ltd v India Securities Ltd [1999] 96 Comp Cas 329 (SC); (1999) 3 SCC 1; AIR 1999 SC 1090. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62-5, 65-18, 65-28 Sakharam Narayan Kherdekar v City of Nagpur Corporation AIR 1964 Bom 200, 2l0. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-19, 30-34 Saligram Ruplal Khanna v Kanwar Rajnath AIR 1974 SC 1094: (1974) 2 SCC 642. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-22 Salmon v Quin and Axtens (1901) 1 Ch 311 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-4, 11-7, 11-18 Saloman v A Saloman & Co. Ltd (1897) AC 22 (HL).. . . . . . 1-10, 1-19, 2-3, 2-5, 2-9, 2-20, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-24, 2-39, 2-47, 3-6, 3-16, 7-5, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-6, 7-7, 7-9, 8-5, 8-14, 9-17, 9-18, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-38, 9-54, 22-4, 35-31, 35-39, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-120, 35-162, 43-147, 43-161, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-23, 50-144 Saltdean Estate Co. Ltd., In re (1968) 3 All ER 829: (1969) 39 Comp Cas 286 (Ch D).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-143 Sam Weller & Sons Ltd., Re, [1990] BCLC 80. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-34 Samittri Devi v Sampuran Singh AIR 2011 SC 773. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66-16 Sampat Mal Lodha v State of Rajastan & Others (1988) 72 FJR 111 (Raj). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-202, 35-204 Sandvik Asia Ltd v Bharat Kumar Padamsi and Others [2009] 151 Comp Cas 251 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15-4 Sandvik Asia Ltd., In re (2004) 121 Comp Cas 58 (Bom): (2004) 58 CLA 125 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15-4, 15-17 Sanitary Carbon Co, Re, (1877) WN 223. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-46, 63-12 Sankar Ram and Co. v. Kasi Naicker (2003) 11 SCC 699.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-65 Santanu Ray v Union of India (1989) 65 Comp Cas 196: (1988) 3 Comp LJ 259 (Del).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-15, 35-40 Santosh Ghosh v Regional Provident Fund Commissioner (1991) 62 FLR 97 (Cal).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-35 Saradindu Sekhar Bannerjee v Lalit Mohan Mazumdar AIR 1941 Cal 538. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-34 cxxxviii
Table of cases
Saraswati Bai v Malati [1978] 48 Comp Cas 264 (Kar). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-32, 14-43 Sarbati Devi v Usha Devi [1984] 55 Comp Cas 241 (SC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-32, 14-43 Sardar Gulab Singh v Punjab Zamindara Bank Ltd. (1941) 11 Comp Cas 301 (Lahore). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-26, 46-36, 46-43 Sardar Harpreet Singh v CIT (1991) 91 CTR 43: (1991) 55 Taxman 97 (All). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-21, 46-52, 46-53 Sardas Gulab Singh v Punjab Zamindara Bank Ltd [1940] 10 Comp Cas 188 (Lah), AIR 1940 Lah 243.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-12 Sarswati Industrial Syndicate Ltd. v. CIT (1991) 70 Comp Cas 184. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40-12 Satish Chand Sanwalka v Tinplate Dealers Association Pvt. Ltd. (1998) 93 Comp Cas 70 (CLB) (Principal Bench). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-15 Satish D. Sanghavi v Union of India [2012] 171 Comp Cas 309 (Bom): [2012] 14 GSTR 264. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-37 Satrucharla Chandrasekhar Raju v Vyricherla Pradeep Kumar Dev AIR 1992 SC 1959. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38-5 Satyanarayana Rathi v Anna Maliar Textiles Pvt. Ltd. (1999) 32 CLA 56. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-50 Satyanarayanamurthi v. ITAT (1958) 33 ITR 123 (AP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-247 Saul D Harrison & Sons Plc, Re, (1995) 1 BCLC 14: (1994) BCC 475 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-16, 55-59 Saumil Dilip Mehta v State of Maharashtra (2003) 113 Comp Cas 443 (Bom): (2002) 39 SCL 102 (Bom) . . . . 43-43, 43-54, 43-131 Saunders & Co Ltd (T H), In re (1908) 1 Ch 415.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20-6 Saurashtra Cement & Chemicals v. Esma Industries (P) Ltd. [1996] 1 Comp. LJ.211 (Guj.). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-96, 14-159 Scientific Apparatus and Chemical Works Ltd v Joti Prasad (B) (1945) 15 Comp Cas 45.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-70 Scott v Scott (1943) 1 All ER 582 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-4, 26-45 Scottish Co-operative Wholesale Society Ltd. v Meyer (1959) AC 324: (1958) 3 WLR 404: (1958) 3 All ER 66: (1959) 29 Comp Cas 1 (HL). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-32, 55-49, 55-90, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-122, 55-123 Scottish Insurance Corporation Limited and Others v Wilson and Clyde Coal Company Ltd [1949] 19 Comp Cas 202 (HL). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15-8, 11-19, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15-17, 15-20 Scottish Petroleum Co, Re, (1883) 23 Ch D 413: (1881-5) All ER Rep 1536.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-15, 43-120, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-121, 50-4 Secretary Madras Gymkhana Club Employees’ Union v Management of the Gymkhana Club AIR 1968 SC 554. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-132
cxxxix
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Secretary of State for Trade and Industry v Deverell (2000) 2 All ER 365.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-10, 44-11, 44-16, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-41, 44-63, 44-65, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-18, 50-19 Secretary of State for Trade and Industry v Griffths [1998] 2 BCLC 646 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-133 Secretary of State for Trade and Industry v Hall 2009 BCC 191 (Ch D).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-17, 44-65, 50-20 Secretary of State for Trade and Industry v Laing (1996) 2 BCLC 324 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-10, 44-64, 50-18 Securities and Exchange Board of India v Sterlite Industries Ltd [2003] 53 CLA 41 (Bom).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40-7, 41-6 Securities and Exchange Board of India v. Kunnamkulam Paper Mills Ltd. [2013] 178 Comp Cas 371( Ker) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18-11 Seksaria Biswan Sugar Factory Ltd. v Commissioner of Income-tax, (Central) Bombay (1950) 18 ITR 139 (Bom): AIR 1950 Bom 200. . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-23 Seksaria Cotton Mills Ltd. v A. E. Naik [1967] 37 Comp Cas 656 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27-5, 27-6, 39-6, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-7, 39-28, 39-30, 39-42 Self Help Private Industrial Estate P Ltd, Re, (1972) 42 Comp Cas 605 (Mad). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53-4, 53-23 Selvarajan & Co v Registrar (1987) 62 Comp Cas 220: (1986) 3 Comp LJ 725 (Mad). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63-13 Senior Electric Inspector v Laxmi Narayan Chopra AIR 1962 SC 159. . . . . . . . . . 63-6, 67-6 Seshkumar Pradhan v Keshav Narayan Acharya 1980 MPLJ 335. . . . . . . . . . . . . 15-6, 15-13 Seth Mohan Lal v Grain Chambers Ltd (1968) 38 Comp Cas 543: (1968) 1 Comp LJ 275 (SC): AIR 1968 SC 772.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-40 Seth Sobhag Mal Lodha & Others v Edward Mills Co. Ltd. (1972) 42 Comp. Cas. 1 (Raj.). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-57, 50-70 Severn Bridge Rly. Co In re (1896) 1 Ch 559: 65 LJ Ch 400.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-5 Shailesh Harilal Shah v Matushree Textiles Ltd (1994) 2 Comp LJ 291 (Bom), (1995) 82 Comp Cas 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-27, 43-31 Shaily Engineering Plastics Ltd., Re, [2003] CLC 161 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-16 Shakti Bhog Foods Ltd v Kola Shipping Ltd (2009) 2 SCC 134: AIR 2009 SC 12: (2008) 13 SCR 925: (2008) 10 JT 694. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-7, 43-29 Shalagram Jhajharia v National Co Ltd (1965) 35 Comp Cas 706 (Cal). . . . . . . . . . . . 31-38 Shalagram Jhajhariav National Co Ltd (1967) 1 Comp LJ 29 (Cal): (1966) 70 CWN 871 (Cal).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-55, 31-56, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38-9, 38-12
cxl
Table of cases
Shalfoon v Cheddar Valley Co-Operative Dairy Co Ltd 1924 NZ LR 561: (1924) NZ GLR 121 (CA).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-5 Shalimar Rope Works Ltd. v Abdul Hussain AIR 1980 SC 1163. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66-13 Sham sunder v State of Haryana (1990) 1CLA 128. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-173, 35-183, 35-212 Shankar (S B) v Amman Steel Corporation (2002) 110 Comp Cas 50 (Mad): (2002) 51 CLA 341 (Mad). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-41 Shankar Finance and Investments v. State of Andhra Pradesh (2008) 8 SCC 536; 2009 AIR 422. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-4, 35-30 Shankarappa v Co-operative Election Commission 2014 AIR CC 1641 (Kar).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-14 Shanmugasundaram (V) v Emerald Automobiles Ltd (2001) 40 CLA 19 (CLB): (2001) 103 Comp Cas 1108 (CLB).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-22 Shanta G Pommeret v Sakal Papers Pvt Ltd (1990) 69 Comp Cas 65 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-5, 11-7, 11-32 Shanta Shamsher Jung Bahadur v Kamani Brothers P Ltd. (1959) 29 Comp Cas 501 (Bom).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-20 Shanti Devi v Ram Lal [1956] 28 Comp Cas 59 All . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-34 Shanti Prasad Jain v Kalinga Tubes Ltd [1965] 35 Comp Cas 351 (SC); 1965 SCR (2) 720; 1965 AIR 1535. . . . . . 55-32, 55-46, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-47, 55-90 Shanti Prasad Jain v Union of India (1973) 75 Bom LR 778. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-25 Sharda Prasad Sinha v. State of Bihar (1977) 1 SCC 505 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-217 Sharp v Dawes (1876) 2 QB 26 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-46, 63-12 Shearer v Bercain Ltd. (1980) 3 All ER 295.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37-6 Sheffield & South Yorkshire Permanant Building Society, Re, [1889] 22 QBD 470.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-34, 43-161 Sheila Devi Chamriav. Tara Chand Sargoi and Others, 1984 Tax L.R. 2224. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-30 Sheodayal Khemka v Joharmull (1924) 50 Cal 549 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-25, 27-11 Sheoratan Agarwal v. State of Madhya Pradesh AIR 1984 SC 1824. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-10, 35-19, 35-103, 35-106, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-195, 35-199, 35-200 Sherwell v Combined Incandescent Mantles (1907) 23 TLR 482. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-180 Sheth Mohanlal Ganaptram v Shri Sayaji Jubilee Cotton and Jute Mills Co Ltd [1964] 34 Comp Cas 777 (Guj). . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-15, 55-38, 55-80, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-84, 55-87, 55-82 Shibu Soren v Dayanand Sahay 2001 AIR 2001 SC 2583: (2001) 7 SCC 425. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-53, 38-6 Shiromani Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee v Shri Som Nath Dass 2000 AIR SCW 1394: (2000) 2 LRI 253 (SC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-6, 1-13, 43-158 cxli
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Shiromani Sugar Mills Ltd v Debi Prasad (1950) 20 Comp Cas 296 (All): AIR 1950 All 508.. . . . . . . . . . . 14-15, 14-121, 14-127, Â . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-34, 31-36, 31-94, 31-97 Shiv Kripal Singh v V V Giri AIR 1970 SC 2097 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15-6, 15-12 Shiv Omkar v Bansidhar AIR 1956 Bom 459 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-5, 11-7, 11-8, 11-18, 11-32 Shivalik Ice Factory & Cold Storage Pvt Ltd. v Registrar (1988) 3 Comp LJ 252 (P&H).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-17 Shivamurthy Swamy Inamdar v Agadi Sanganna Anandappa (1971) 3 SCC 870. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-53, 38-6 Shivdas Govind Lanjewar v Municipal Council AIR 1986 Bom 268 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45-5 Shivial Motilal v Tricumdas Mills Ltd (1912) ILR 36 Born 564:14 Bom LR 45 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-42, 43-52, 43-129 Shoe Specialities Pvt Ltd v Standard Distilleries & Breweries Pvt Ltd (1997) 90 Comp Cas 1.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-25 Shree Ayyanar Spg & Wvg Mills Ltd. v Rajendran (V V V) (1973) 43 Comp Cas 225 (Mad). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17-8 Shree Dharma Sugar Industries Pvt Ltd. v Registrar (1989) 66 Comp Cas 337 (Kar).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-17 Shree Ram Mills Ltd. v Commissioner of Excess Profits Tax, Central Bombay AIR 1953 SC 485. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24-7, 50-38 Shrenikraj v Labour Officer (1986) 60 Comp Cas 658 (Kar). . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-197, 35-220 Shri Balaji Textile Mills Pvt Ltd. v Ashok Kavle (1989) 66 Comp Cas 654 (Kar): (1990) 3 CLA 110 (Kar): (1989) 3 Comp LJ 322 (Kar).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-142, 64-14 Shri Krishna Prasad v ROC (1978) 48 Comp Cas 397 (Del). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-26 Shrikrishna Tiles and Potteries (Madras) Pvt. Ltd. v. Company Law Board (1979) 49comp. Cas. 309. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56-8 Shrimati Abnash Kaur v Lord Krishna Sugar Mills Ltd. [1974] 44 Comp Cas 390 (Del).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-72 Shrimati Jain v. Delhi Flour Mills Co. Ltd. and others [1974] 44 Comp Cas 228 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-103, 50-133 Shriram Mills Ltd v CIT (1953) 23 ITR 120 (SC): AIR 1953 SC 485. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-34 Shubh Shanti Services Ltd v Manjula S Agarwal (2005) 125 Comp Cas 477 (SC); 005 AIR SCW 2663. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-135, 44-26 Shubha Mukherjee v Bharat Coaking Coal Ltd 2000 AIR SCW 865. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-18 Shuttleworth v Cox Bros & Co (1927) 2 KB 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53-18 Shyam Alloys Ltd v Assistant Commissioner of Customs [2017] 42 GSTR 212 (A. P.). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66-13 Shyam Chand v Calcutta Stock Exchange Ltd AIR 1949 Cal 337:ILR (1945) 2 Cal 313. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-10
cxlii
Table of cases
Shyam Sundar v. State of Haryana, (1990) 3 CLA 128: AIR 1989 SC 1982. . . . . . . . . . 47-9 Shyamapada Chakraberty v Controller of Insurance AIR 1962 SC 1355.. . . . . . . . . . . 60-11 Sidebottom v Holland [1895] 1 QB 378. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-14 Sidhvi Constructions (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Registrar of Companies [1997] 90 Comp Cas 299 (AP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-4, 12-5, 13-5 SIEL Ltd, Re, [2008] 144 Comp Cas 469 (Delhi) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15-27 Siemens Engineering and Mfg. Co. (India) Ltd. v. Union of India AIR 1976 SC 1785. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56-12 SIL Import v Exim Aides Silk Exporters 1999 AIR SCW 1218; (1999) 4 SCC 567; [1999] 97 Comp Cas 575 (SC) . . . . . . . . 49-17, 50-42, 52-15, 63-10 Simmons v Heath Laundry Co. (1910) 1 KB 543.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-26, 46-32 Simplex Castings Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, Vishakhapatnam [2003] 5 SCC 528. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67-7 Simpson v Heaton’s Steel & Iron Co (1870) 23 LT 511.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-127 Singer Manufacturing Co. v Loog (1880) 18 Ch D 395. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-21 Sir Mathurzadas Vissanji Foundation, In re. [1992] 8 CLA 170 (Bom.)/ [1996] 1 Comp. LJ 530 (Bom.). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-6, 39-24 Sitarama Reddy v Bellary Spinning & Weaving Co Ltd (1984) 56 Comp Cas 281 (Kar).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-139, 14-147, 14-148 Siva Sankara Panicker (C.K.) v Kerala Financial Corporation (1980) 50 Comp Cas 817 (Ker).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-17 Sivaraman (B) v Egmore Benefit Society Ltd (1992) 75 Comp Cas 199 (Mad). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-20 Sliegh v Glasgow and Transvaal Options (1904) 6 F 420 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-178 Sly, Spink & Co, In re, (1911) 2 Ch 430 (Ch D).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-120, 43-126 SMC Pharmaceuticals Ltd v Neeta Bhalla [2005] 127 Comp Cas 563 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-14 Smita Subhash Sawant v Jagdeeshwari Jagdish Amin AIR 2016 Supreme Court 1409 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-152 Smith & Fawcett Ltd, Re, [1942] 1 All ER 542. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-61 Smith (Howard) Ltd v Ampol Petroleum Ltd (supra) . . . . . . . . 14-89, 14-90, 14-91, 14-152, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-154, 55-66, 55-68 Smith v Butler [2012] 2 Bus LR 1836 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-30 Smith v Hancock, said ([1933] All ER Rep. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69-9 Smith v Henniker-Major & Co [2002] 2 BCLC 655, [2002] BCC 768 (CA).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60-4, 60-6, 43-193, Smith v Paringa Mines (1906) 2 Ch 193 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-19, 49-59, 50-50, 50-52, 50-56 SMS Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v Neeta Bhalla [2005] 127 Comp Cas 563 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-172, 35-182 Smt Raj v Devi Datta Mall [1979] 49 Comp Cas 301 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-35 cxliii
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Smt. G. Vijayalakshmi And Others v Securities and Exchange Board of India [2000] 100 Comp Cas 726 (AP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-25 Smt. Jayalakshmi Acharya v Kal Electronics & Consultants P Ltd [1997] 13 SCL 1 (CLB) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20-15 Smt. Somawanti & Others v The State of Punjab AIR 1963 SC 151: (1963) 33 Comp. Cas. 745 (SC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57-25 Society for Civic Rights v. Colgate Palmolive India Ltd . [1991] 72 Comp Cas 80 (MRTPC)(SP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63-3 Sohan Pathak and Sons, Banaras - Applicants v Commissioner of Income-tax AIR 1950 All 648.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-21 Solvex Oils & Fertilisers v Bhandari Cross Fields Pvt Ltd. [1978] 48 Comp Cas 260 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13-11 Som Prakash Rekhi v Union of India (1981) 51 Comp Cas 71: (1981) 1 SCC 449: AIR 1981 SC 212. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-8, 1-9 Someshchandra Mittal v Jivanlal C. Chinai AIR 1956 Bom 190. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-20 Sonepat Co-operative Sugar Mills Ltd. v. Ajit Singh (2005) 3 SCC 232. . . . . . . . . . . . 30-21 Sonewala v Lahore Electric Supply Co Ltd (1935) 5 Comp Cas 357.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-69 Sorabji Jamsetji v Ishwardas Jugjiwandas (1896) ILR 20 Bom 654 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-72 South African Supply and Cold Storage Co., In re (1904) 2 Ch. 268. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41-11 South Bihar Sugar Mills Ltd v Union of India AIR 1968 SC 922.. . . . . . . . . . 14-131, 31-31, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-40, 33-8 South Hetton Coal Company v North Eastern News Association (1894) 1 QB 133. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-8, 3-11 South of England Natural Gas and Petroleum Co Ltd (1911) 1 Ch 573.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-180 Southern Counties Deposit Bank v Rider and Kirkwood (1895) 73 LT 374 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34-24, 43-204, 60-21 Southern Foundries (1926) Ltd. v Shirlaw (1940) 10 Comp Cas 11 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-21 Southern Petrochemicals Industries Co Ltd v Electricity Inspector (2007) 5 SCC 447: AIR 2007 SC 1964.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-33 Spargo’s case (1873) LR 8 Ch 407. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-17 Sparks v. Liverpool Water Works Co. [1807] 13 Ves. 428. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-14 Spencer & Co. Ltd. v CWT (1969) 39 Comp Cas 212 (Mad): AIR 1969 Mad 359. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-27, 2-10, 8-10 Spencer v Kennedy (1925) 1 Ch 125. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-129, 14-130 Spiller v Mayo (Rhodesia) Development Co. Ltd. (1926) WN 78. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52-18 Spindel Fabrik Sussen v Sussen Textile Bearings Ltd (1989) 2 CLA 202. . . . . . . . . . . 14-50 Spitzel v Chinese Corporation (1899) 80 LT 347. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-127 Springbok Agricultural Estates Ltd, Re, [1920] 1 Ch 563. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-29 cxliv
Table of cases
SPS Pharma Ltd. , Re, (1997) 25 CLA 110 (AP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40-12 Sree Gajanana Motor Transport Co Ltd v Union of India (1992) 73 Comp Cas 348 (Kar) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-16, 30-31 Sree Gopal Jalan v Calcutta Stock Exchange Association Limited (1963) 33 Comp Cas 862: (1963) 2 Comp LJ 198: AIR 1964 SC 250. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-68, 14-106, 14-122, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-126, 18-14, 31-93, 39-15 SRG Infotech Ltd. v Datapro Electronics Pvt. Ltd. (2005) 123 Comp Cas 43: (2004) 62 CLA 147: (2005) 6 CLC 108 (CLB).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58-6 Sri Murugan Oil Industries Pvt Ltd v Athi V. Suryanarayana Chettiar [1963] 33 Comp Cas 833; [1963] 1 Comp LJ 158; AIR 1963 Mad 128. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27-16 Sri Raj Sachdev v Board of Revenue AIR 1959 All 595 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-21 Sri Ramdas Motor Transport Ltd v Karedla Suryanaryana, (2002) 48 CLA 113: (2002) 110 Comp Cas 193 (AP).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-54 Srikanta Datta Narasimharaja Wadiyar v Sri Venkateswara Real Estate Enterprises (Pvt.) Ltd. [1991] 72 Comp Cas 211; (1999) 3 Comp LJ 336 (Kar).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-74, 55-115 Srimati Jain v Delhi Floor Mills Co. Ltd. (1974) 44 Comp Cas 228 (Del) . . . . . . . . . . 17-13 Standard Chartered Bank v. Directorate of Enforcement (2005) 4 SCC 405. . . . . . . . . 35-92 State Bank of India v Alstom Power Boilers Ltd [2003] 116 Comp Cas 1 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-10 State Bank of India v Indexport Registered (1992) 2 SCC 159. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-172 State Bank of India v. Balak Raj Abrol (1989) 66 Comp Cas 526. . . . . . . . . . 35-111, 43-170 State Bank of India v. Viswaniryat (P.) Ltd. (1987) 3 Comp. LJ 171 (Ker.). . . . . . . . . . 57-14 State Bank of Travancore v Kingston Computers P Ltd [2011] 163 Comp Cas 37 (SC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-32 State Industrial and Invest. Corpn. of Mah. Ltd. v Maharashtra State Fin. Corpn. (1988) 64 Comp. Cas. 102 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57-20, 64-7 State of Bihar v Sitaram Jhunjhunwala AIR 1967 Pat 433. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-146, 43-41, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-53, 43-129 State of Bihar v. Yogendra Singh air 1982 SC 882. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25-11 State of Bombay v Vishnu Ramchandra AIR 1961 SC 307. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-11 State of Gujarat v. Patel Ramjibhai Danabhai AIR 1979 SC 1098. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25-11 State of Himachal Pradesh v Himachal Techno Engineers 2010 AIR SCW 5088 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-24, 65-29 State of Karnataka v Mysore Coffee Curing Works Ltd. (1984) 55 Comp Cas 70 (Kar).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-137, 14-142 State of Karnataka v Pratap Chand [1981] 51 Comp Cas 198 (SC). . . . . . . . . . . 35-202, 47-9 cxlv
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
State of Kerala v West Coast Planters Agencies Ltd (1958) 28 Comp Cas 13 (Ker) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-48, 50-116, 63-12 State of M.P. v. Hiralal (1996) 7 SCC 523. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66-7 State of Madhya Pradesh v. G. S. Dall and Flour Mills (1992) Supp (1) SCC 150. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67-5 State of Madras v Gannon Dunkerley & Co (Madras) Ltd [1958] 9 STC 353 (SC); AIR 1958 SC 560 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63-5 State of Madras v. C.V. Parekh AIR 1971 SC 447. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-102, 35-195 State of Maharashtra and Anr. v. Dr. Praful B. Desai AIR 2003 SC 2053. . . . . . . . . . . 50-43 State of Maharashtra v Mayer Hans George AIR 1965 SC 722. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-118 State of Maharashtra v Vishnu Ramachandra AIR 1961 SC 307. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-21 State of Maharashtra v. Dr. Praful B .Desai (2003) 4 SCC 601. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63-6, 63-7 State of Maharashtra v. Nanded Parbhani Z.L.B.M.V. Operator Sangh 2000 AIR SCW 261 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-41, 18-4, 18-5, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19-20, 21-57, 31-73, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-79, 35-240, 43-18, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-61, 45-4 State of MP v Narayan Singh & Others (1989) 3 SCC 596: AIR 1989 SC 1789.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-118 State of Orissa v Titaghur Paper Mills Company Limited 1985 (3) SCR 26: AIR 1985 SC 1293: 1985 Supp. SCC 280: 1985 (2) Scale 410.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-40, 50-120 State of Punjab and Ors. v.Amritsar Beverages Ltd & Ors. 2006 AIR SCW 3961.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-43 State of Punjab v Amritsar Beverages Ltd 2006 AIR SCW 3961. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63-7 State of Punjab v Gurmit Singh 2014 AIR SCW 3800. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-8 State of Tamil Nadu v Hind Stone AIR 1981 SC 711. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67-3 State of Tamil Nadu v K. Shyam Sunder 2011 AIR SCW 5014. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-10 State of Tamil Nadu v Mahi Traders (1989) 1 SCC 724. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67-6 State of U P v Renusagar Power Co Ltd (1991) 70 Comp Cas 127: (1989) 1 CLA 1 (SC) : AIR 1988 SC 1737.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-24, 2-5, 2-14, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-30, 2-33, 8-10 State of U. P. v Babu Ram Upadhya AIR 1961 SC 751. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67-3 State of West Bengal v Scene Screen Pvt Ltd 2000 AIR SCW 3530. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52-12 State of Wyoming Syndicate, Re, [1902] 2 Ch 431 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60-7, 43-194 State Trading Corporation of India Ltd. v Commercial Tax Officer, Visakhapatnam AIR 1963 SC 1811: (1963) 33 Comp Cas 1057 (SC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-14, 1-20, 2-20, 22-3, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-39, 8-5, 22-4, 29-5, 35-4, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-30, 35-31, 43-157 cxlvi
Table of cases
State v S.P. Bhadani AIR 1959 Patna 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-215 State v. S. J. Choudhary (1996) 2 SCC 428 : 1996 SCC (Cri) 336: 1996 AIR SCW 1128 at p.1131. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-17, 50-42, 52-16 63-11 Statesman (Private) Ltd. v. H. R. Deb AIR 1968 SC1495.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-52 Stephens v Mysore Reefs (Kangundy) Mining Co. Ltd. (1902) 1 Ch 745: 18 TLR 327.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-19 Stevens Ex parte, (1852) 16 JP 632 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-86 Stevenson, Jordan and Harrison Ltd. v MacDonald and Evans (1952) 1 TLR 101 (CA).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-32 Stewart Precision Carburetor Co, Re, 1912 TLR 335. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-139 Stewart v Chapman [1951] 2 All ER 613. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62-5, 65-18 Sticky Fingers Restaurant Ltd, Re, (1991) BCC 754. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-126, 50-90, 50-110 Stone & Rolls Ltd v Moore Stephens [2008] Bus LR 1579 (CA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-75 Stone & Rolls Ltd v Moore Stephens [2009] UKHL 39; [2009] Bus LR 1356;[2009] 2 BCLC 563 (HL). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-27, 44-13, 50-19 Story v Rees.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-38 Stothers v William Steward (holdings) Ltd [1994] 2 BCLC 266 (CA).. . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-18 Stoughton v. Reynolds, [1786] 95 ER 176:2 Str.1045.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-70 Stroud v. Royal Aquarium, etc., Society (1903) 89 L.T.243. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-87 Stumpp, Schuele and Somappa Ltd v CIT (1991) 190 ITR 152 (Kar). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67-6 Stup Consultants Ltd v Union of India (1987) 61 Comp Cas 784 (Del): (1986) 3 Comp LJ 260 (Del). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-22, 30-31, 30-32 Subash Chandra Kankaria v. State of Rajasthan [1999] 114 STC 413. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-162 Subba Naidu (R) v CG (1969) 39 Comp Cas 766: (1969) 73 ITR 794 (Mad). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-69 Subhash Ramkumar Bind alias Vakil v. State of Maharashtra (2003) 1 SCC 506. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67-5 Subhra Mukherjee v Bharat Coking Coal Ltd (2000) 101 Comp Cas 257 (SC): 2000 CLC 677; 2000 AIR SCW 865 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-25, 2-35,2-17, 69-10 Suburban Bank P Ltd. v Thariath (1968) 38 Comp Cas 13 (Ker): (1967) 2 Comp LJ 182.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-61 Sudarshan Cargo Techvac Engineering Pvt Ltd AIR 2014 Karnataka 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . 63-12 Sudarshan Chits India Ltd. v Registrar (1986) 56 Comp Cas 261: (1984) 3 Comp LJ 28 (Ker) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-17 Sudarshan Talkies (Delhi) P Ltd v Chief Controlling Revenue Authority (1978) 48 Comp Cas 591 (Del). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-20, 14-21 Sudheer Reddy v State of Andhra Pradesh [2000] 99 Comp Cas 107 (AP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-221 cxlvii
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Sudhir Kumar Seal v Asstt. Registrar of Companies (1979) 49 Comp Cas 462 (Cal). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67-9 Suessen Textile Bearings Ltd. v Union of India [1984] 55 Comp. Cas. 492 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-9 Sugam Parivahan Ltd v Dipak Chowdhury AIR 2018 Tripura 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-190 Sugrabhai Alibhai v Amtee Properties (P) Ltd. [1984] 55 Comp Cas 734 (Bom).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-183 Sujansing Ajitsing Mohota v Ramchandrarao Krishnarao Singaroo AIR 1949 Nag 104.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-34 Sukhram Singh v. Harbheji AIR 1969 SC 1114. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-7 Suleman Haji Ahmed Umer v Haji Abdulla Haji Rahimtulla 42 Bom LR 971. . . . . 44-46, 50-33 Suman Kumar Sinha v Baroda Crystal Glass Works Ltd [2013] 181 Comp Cas 65 (CLB). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20-8 Sumitra Pharmaceuticals & Chemicals Ltd case (1997) 88 Comp Cas 619. . . . . . . . . . 40-15 Sunder Lal Jain v Sandeep Paper Mills P Ltd [1986] 60 Comp Cas 77: [1995] 1 Comp LJ 356 (P&H) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-17, 49-18 Sunder Singh v Kehar Singh AIR 1933 Lah 1017. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-13 Suneet Gupta v. Anil Triloknath Sharma AIR 2008 SC (Supp) 1934. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-80 Sunil Bharti Mittal v Central Bureau of Investigation AIR 2015 SC 923; [2015] 191 Comp Cas 177 (SC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-81 Sunil K Alagh v Britannia Industries Ltd. (1993) 11 CLA 68 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-36, 46-52, 46-53, 48-49 Sunil Kalra v Bawa Shoes Leather Guild Pvt Ltd [2008] 142 Comp Cas 350 (CLB); (2008) 215 CTR 350; 2007 80 SCL 1 CLB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-71, 55-76 Sunil Parmeshwar Mittal v. Dy. Commissioner (Recovery Cell), Central Excise 2005 (188) ELT 268 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-37 Sunshine Porcelain Potteries Proprietary Ltd v Nash [1961] 3 All ER 203. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-4 Superintendence Company of India (PJ Ltd. v. Krishan Murgai AIR 1980 SC 1717. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69-8 Supply of Ready Mixed Concrete (No 2), Director General of Fair Trading v Pioneer Concrete (UK) Ltd, Re, [1995] 1 All ER 135 (HL) . . . . . . . . . 35-100 Supreme Court’ decision in V B Rangaraj. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-8 Surabhi Chemicals and Investments Ltd, In re (2009) 149 Comp Cas 278 (Guj).. . . . . 50-29 Surajmall v. Sagarmall AIR 1949 FC 211. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-6 Surajmull Nagarmull v Shew Bhagwan Jalan (1973) ILR Cal 207.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53-4 Surendra Kumar Dhawan v R. Vir (1977) 47 Comp Cas 276 (Del). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58-4 Suresh Chandra v Birdi Chand AIR 1965 Raj 229. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-18
cxlviii
Table of cases
Suresh Jindal v BSES Rajdhani Power Limited and Ors. 2007 AIR SCW 6748 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-43, 63-7 Suresh Kumar Sanghi v Supreme Motors Ltd [1983] 54 Comp Cas 235 (Delhi). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-84, 55-117 Surinder Nath Khosla v Excise and Taxation Commissioner (1964) 15 STC 836 (P&H). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-35, 35-45, 43-149 Suryajirao v New Phaltan Sugar Works Ltd [1995] 19 CLA 331 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-7, 50-63 Suryakant Gupta v Rajaram Corn Products (Punjab) Ltd. (2001) 41 CLA 284 (CBL). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-49 Sushir Kumar Lahiri v Registrar of Companies (1983) 53 Comp Cas 54 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-9 Sussex Peerage case (1844) 11 CI&F 85 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-12, 8-19, 9-17, 14-41, 23-11, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24-8, 31-78, 45-3, 48-7 Suzuki Motor Corporation v Union of India [1997] 4 Comp LJ 173 (Del).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-63 Swadeshi Cotton Mills Co Ltd, Re, (1932) 2 Comp Cas 411 (All): AIR 1932 All 291. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-21 Swadeshi Polytex Ltd. In re [(1988) 63 Comp. Cas. 709 (Delhi). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52-19 Swapan Dasgupta v Navin Chand Suchanti (1988) 64 Comp Cas 562 (Cal).. . . . . . . . 43-86 Swastik Textile Mills Ltd In re [1985] 57 Comp Cas 766 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-8, 44-39, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-61, 50-16 Swdeshi Cotton Mills Ltd. v. Union of India [1981] 51 Comp Cas 210 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56-4 Swedish Match AB v. Securities and Exchange Board, India, AIR 2004 SC 4219. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-12, 48-7 Sweet v Parsley 1970 AC 132.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-118 Syed Mahomed All v R. Sundaramurthy (1958) 28 Comp Cas 554: (1958) ILR 838 (Mad) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-23, 55-116 T & N Ltd and others, Re, (No 4) [2007] Bus LR 1411 (Ch). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-29 T H Vakil v Bombay Residency Radio Club Ltd (1946) 16 Comp Cas 8 (Bom): AIR 1945 Bom 475. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-84 T Murali v State (1976) 46 Comp Cas 613 (Mad). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-146, 43-53, 43-129 T R Pratt (Bombay) Ltd v E D Sasson & Co Ltd [1936] 6 Comp Cas 90 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-91, 59-7 T.M. Chacko & Co. Pvt. Ltd. v CAgIT (1993) 203 ITR 911 (Ker): (1993) 113 CTR 414 (Ker).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-31 Tahsildar Singh v State of U.P. AIR 1959 SC 1012. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-16 TAM Athavan v Sun Freight Systems P Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-19 Tamal Lahiri v Kumar P N Tagore AIR 1978 SC 1811 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-25 cxlix
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Tarjitsingh Bakhatawarsing Batth v. Ratan Wood P. Ltd. [2013] 180 Comp Cas 124 (CLB). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-85 Tarlok Chand Khanna v Raj Kumar Kapoor (1983) 54 Com Cas 12 (Delhi). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-50, 43-5, 46-10, 53-14 Tarun Prasad Chatterjee v Dinanath Sharma , AIR 2001 SC 36. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-17, 62-4 Tata Engineering & Locomotive Co Ltd v State of Bihar (1964) 34 Comp Cas 458 (SC): AIR 1965 SC 40. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-14, 1-23, 2-4, 2-32, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-43, 2-47, 7-6, 8-9, 35-30 Tata Iron & Steel Co Ltd, Re, AIR 1928 Bom 80. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-25, 52-5 Tata Oil Mills Ltd, Re, (1994) 3 Comp LJ 46 (Bom): (1994) 14 CLA 13 (Bom).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-22 Tata Power Company Ltd. v. Reliance Energy Ltd. (2009) 16 SCC 659) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-10 Taurine Co. , Re, [1883] 25 Ch. D. 118 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48-15 Taylor v. Goodwin (1879) 4 Q.B.D. 228 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63-4 TCB Ltd v Gray [1986] BCLC 113 (Ch). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-142, 49-43 Tea Brokers (P) Ltd. v Hemendra Prasad Barooah (1998) 5 Comp LJ 463 (Cal).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-21 Tech Corporation Ltd v Millar (1972) 33 DLR (3d) 282. . . . . . . . . . . . 14-90, 14-153, 55-67 Technical Consultancy House P Ltd. v Kuldip Raj Narang (1989) 66 Comp Cas 410 (Del): (1987) 2 Comp LJ 138.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-137, 44-25 Teede & Bishop, Re, (1901) 70 LJ 409 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-84, 50-87 Telesound India Ltd., In re [1983] 53 Comp. Cas. 926. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-31 Tenneco Mauritius Ltd. v Bangalore union Services Ltd. (2003) CLC 1224: (2003) 56 CLA 314: (2003) 45 SCL 205: (2004) 122 Comp Cas 199 (CLB); (2003) 2 CompLJ 315 CLB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-50 Tesco Supermarkets Ltd. v Nattrass (1972) A.C. 153; (1971) 2 All ER 127 H.L. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-42, 8-8, 35-49, 35-85, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-96, 35-122, 43-145 Tett v Phoenix Property & Investment Co. Ltd. (1986) BCLC 149. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-50 Tewari (S R) v District Board AIR 1964 SC 1680. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-36, 46-52, 48-48 The Air Transport Ltd., In re (1955) Comp Cas 473 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57-10 The Bank of Bihar v. Directors’ report. Damodar Prasad (1969) 39 Comp Cas 133 (SC): AIR 1969 SC 297. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-110, 43-171 The British Empire Match Co Ltd, Re, (1888) 59 L.T. 291. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-6 The Company Law Board v. The Upper Doab Sugar Mills Ltd. AIR 1977 SC 831. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56-14 The Great Indian Motor Works Ltd v Chandi Das [1953] 23 Comp Cas 297 (Cal). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-96 The Inertia Partnership LLP, Re, [2007] Bus LR 879. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-29 cl
Table of cases
The King v. Brislan : Ex Parte Williams [1935] 54 C.L.R. 262. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63-5 The Philadelphia Securities Co v The Realisation, etc., Corp. of Scotland Ltd (1903) 11 SLT 217. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40-10 The Regulation and Control of Radio Communication in Canada, In re [1932] A.C. 304. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63-5 The Suburaman Bank Pvt. Ltd. v. Thariath (1967) II Comp LJ 182 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-207 Thermax Ltd v K M Johny & Others 2011 AIR SCW 5952. . . . . . . . . . . 35-70, 35-78, 35-89 Thompson and another v Goblin Hill Hotels Ltd [2011] 1 BCLC 587 (PC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-23 Thompson v Drysdale 1925 SC 311. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-13 Thompson v Simpson (1960) 3 All ER 500.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53-5, 65-24 Thorn EMI Plc (1988) 4 BCC 698: (1989) BCLC 612 (Ch D).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15-27, 37-11 Thrift Drug, Inc. v. Universal Prescription Adm’rs, 131 F.3d 95, 97 (2d Cir. 1997) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-44, 8-11 Tikam Chand Jain v State Government of Haryana (1987) 62 Comp Cas 601 (P&H) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-35, 35-45, 43-149, 43-165 Tilbury Portland Cement Co. Ltd. (1893) 62 LJ Ch. 814: 69 LT 495.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-19 Tile Works v Sudarsan Trading Co. Ltd. (1992) 74 Comp Cas 423 (Mad). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-12 Times Bank Ltd v Sri Sharada Parmeshwari Textiles Limited [2000] 101 Comp Cas 412 (CLB). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-13 Tin Plate Dealers Association P. Ltd v Satish Chandra Sanwalka [2016] 199 Comp Cas 205 (SC).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-8 Tobian Properties Ltd, Re, [2013] Bus LR 753 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-135 Tolaram Jalan, Re, (1959) 29 Comp Cas 34 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-26 Tony Francis Guineess v Indekka Software Pvt. Ltd (2005) 61 SCL 217 (Bom) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17-13 Toronto Corporation v. Bell Telephone Company of Canada [1905] A.C. 52. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63-5 Totalal v State (1963) 1 Comp LJ 133 (Raj): AIR 1963 Raj 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-46, 50-33 Towers v African Tug Co (1904) 1 Ch 558 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-29, 34-22, 34-24, 35-66 TR Pratt (Bombay) Ltd v MT Ltd (1938) 8 Comp Cas 137 (PC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-30 Tracstar Investment Ltd v Gordon Woodroffe Ltd (1996) 20 CLA 267 (Mad) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-134 Tracstar Investments Ltd v Gordon Woodroffe Ltd (1996) 1 Comp. LJ 462 (CLB). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-5 Transcontinental Hotel Ltd, In re [1947] SASR 49 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-115 Transport Co v Tinneveli M B Service Co AIR 1955 NUC 3186 (Mad). . . . . . . . . . . . 64-17 Transport Ltd v Schonberg (1905) 21 TLR 305. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-40 cli
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Transvaal Lands Co v New Belgium (Transvaal) Land & Development Co [1914] 2 Ch 488 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-30 Travancore National and Quilon Bank, In re [1939] 9 Comp Cas 14 . . . . . . . . . . . 27-5, 39-6 Trench Tubeless Tyre Co, Re, (1900) 1 Ch 408 (CA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-85, 50-87 Trevor v Whiteworth (1887) 12 App Cas 409 (HL). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-17 Trevor v Whiteworth(1887) 12 App Cas 409. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-12, 21-20 Tribhovandas v Gujrat Revenue Tribunal (1991) 3 SCC 442. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-16 Trilok Singh v. Satya Deo Tripathi AIR 1979 SC 850. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-79 Trimes International FZE Ltd v Vedanta Aluminium Ltd (2010) 3 SCC 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-7 Trimex International FZE Ltd v Vedanta Aluminium Ltd 2010 AIR SCW 909: (2010) 3 SCC 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-29 Tristar Consultants v Customer Services India (P) Ltd [2007] 78 CLA 363 (Del). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-165 Tri-Sure India Ltd (1983) 54 Comp Cas 197 (Bom) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-26, 35-225 Tritonia Ltd v Equity and Law Life Assurance Society (1943) AC 584. . . . . . . . 52-25, 52-26 Trollope & Colls Ltd v North West Metropolitan Regional Hospital Board [1973] 2 All ER 260. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-23 Trussed Steel Concrete Co. Ltd. v Green (1946) Ch 115: (1946) 16 Comp Cas 207.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-24 Trustor AB v Smallbone [2001] 3 All ER 987 (Ch D). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-33 Turner Morrison & Co. Ltd. v Hungerford Investment Trust Ltd. AIR 1969 Cal 238. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-26, 8-10 Turner Morrison & Co. Ltd. v. Shalimar Tar Products Ltd. [1980] 50 Comp Cas 296 (Cal.). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-44, 21-42 Tussaud v Tussaud, (1890) 44 Ch D 678 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-13 Twomax Ltd v Dickson, McFarlane and Robinson [1982] SC 113. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-20 Tyne Mutual Steamship Insurance v Brown (1896) 74 LTR 283. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-95 U P Pollution Control Board v Modi Distillary AIR 1988 SC 1128. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-197 U P Pollution Control Board v Mohan Meakins Ltd 2000 CLC 887 (SC). . . . . . . . . . 35-220 U. P. Pollution Control Board v. Modi Distillary [1988] 63 Comp Cas 77. . . . . . 35-105, 35-198 U.P. Paper Corpn. Ltd. v Registrar (1987) 2 Comp LJ 231 (Cal).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-17 U.P. Pollution control Board v Modi distillery and Others [1988] 63 Comp. Cas. 77 (SC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-213 U.P. State Warehousing Corporation v Tyagi (C K) AIR 1970 SC 1224. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-36, 46-52, 48-48 UK Safety Group Ltd v Heane and another [1998] 2 BCLC 208 (ChD). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-4 Uma Shakar Gopalika v State of Bihar (2005) 10 SCC 336,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-76
clii
Table of cases
Union Bank of India v Manku Narayana [1987] 62 Comp Cas 1: AIR 1987 SC 1078. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-111, 43-170, 43-172 Union Bank of India v. Khader International Construction AIR 2001 SC 2277;2001 AIR SCW 2045;(2001) 105 Comp Cas856. . . . . . . . . . . . 1-13 Union Benefit Guarantee Company v Thakorlal Thakor (1935) 37 Bom LR 1033. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-9 Union Music Limited [2003] EWCA Civ 180. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-30 Union of India & Anr. v. Kartick Chandra Mondal and Anr 2010 AIR SCW 743 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-4 Union of India v Brigadier P S Gill (2012) 4 SCC 463.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-65 Union of India v Delhi Cloth & General Mills Ltd AIR 1963 SC 791. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-131, 31-31, Â . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-40, 33-8 Union of India v Filip Tiago De Gama of Vedam Vasco De Gama [1990] 1 SCC 277. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-84 Union of India v Hansoli Devi 2002 AIR SCW 3755.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24-8, 48-7 Union of India v Hansoli Devi AIR 2002 SC 3240 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-62 Union of India v Indusind Bank Ltd AIR 2016 SC 4374. . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-59, 51-18, 61-19 Union of India v Jain (R.C)AIR 1981 SC 951: 1981 (2) SCC 308: 1981(2) SCR 854: 1981(1) Scale 320: 1981 (19) DLT 305. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-41 Union of India v Jalyan Udyog AIR 1994 SC 88: 1994 (1) SC 318: 1993 (3) Scale 758: 1993 (5) JT 266. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-5 Union of India v Kartick Chandra Mondal 2010 AIR SCW 743. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-4 Union of India v Manik Dattatraya Lotlikar (1988) 172 ITR 1 (Bom).. . . . . . . . . . . . 43-153 Union of India v Namit Sharma, 2013 AIR SCW 5382. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67-4 Union of India v R.C. Jain AIR 1981 SC 951: 1981 (2) SCC 308: 1981(2) SCR 854: 1981 (1) Scale 320: 1981 (19) DLT 305. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-7 Union of India v S. Srinivasan 2012 AIR SCW 3622. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-60 Union of India v Sri Ladulal Jain AIR 1963 SC 168 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68-4 Union of India v. Gopal Chandra Misra AIR 1978 SC 694 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-127, 43-132 Union of India v. Hindustan Development Corporation (1993) 3 SCC 499: (AIR 1994 SC 988). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-55 Union of India v. India Fisheries (Private) Limited AIR 1966 SC 35 [1965] 35 Comp Cas 669 (SC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-64 Union of India v. Kulu Valley Transport Ltd. [1958] 28 Comp Cas 29. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-6 Union of India v. Raghubir Singh [1989] 66 Comp Cas 466. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-18 Union of India v. Rakesh Kumar (2001) 4 SCC 309 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67-5 Union Services Pvt. Ltd., In re.[1973] 43 Comp. Cas. 319 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-42 Unisoft Group Ltd, Re, (No. 3) (1994) 1 BCC 609: 1994 BCC 766.. . . . 44-15, 44-41, 44-65
cliii
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
United Bank of India v United India Credit & Development Co. Ltd. [1977] 47 Comp Cas 689 (Cal). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-5, 39-23 United Bank of India v. Naresh Kumar [1997] 90 Comp Cas 329 (SC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-38 United Breweries (Holdings) Ltd v Karnataka State Industrial Investment and Development Corporation Ltd [2013] 176 Comp Cas 292 (Kar) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-49 United Breweries Ltd v Ruttonjee & Co Ltd (1963) 2 Comp LJ 155 (Cal). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-90, 50-109 United States v. Bestfoods 524 U.S. 51 (1998). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-36 United Western Bank Ltd In re [2002] 3 Comp LJ 247 (CLB) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52-24, 52-26 Universal Banking Corpn, Re, (1867) 3 Ch App 40. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-121 Upendra Kumar Joshi Manik Lal Chatterjee (1982) 52 Comp Cas 177 (Pat) . . . . . . . . 26-17 Uruguay Central and Hygueritas Railway Co of Monte Video, In re, (1879) 11 Ch D 372. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40-5 Uttar Pradesh State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd v Monsanto Manufacturers Ltd [2015] 189 Comp Cas 69 (SC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-16 V B Rangaraj v V B Gopalakrishnan (1991) 6 CLA 211 (SC): (1992) 73 Comp Cas 201:AIR 1992 SC 453 (1992) 1 Comp LJ 11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-8, 11-27, 21-49 V B Sivalingam Chettiar v Labour Officer [1986] 59 Comp. Cas. 701 (AP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-196 V G Balasundaram v New Theatres Carnatic Talkies Pvt Ltd (1993) 77 Comp Cas 324 (1995) Comp LJ 231 (Mad). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-123 V P Sarathi v Asha Bagree [1992] 75 Comp Cas 372. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49-17 V S Krishnan v Westfort Hi-Tech Hospital Ltd [2008] 142 Comp Cas 235 (SC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-18, 55-56, 55-133 V Sebastian v City Hospital Pvt Ltd (1985) 57 Comp Cas 453 (Ker).. . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-124 V Shankar v South Indian Concerns Ltd (1997) 11 SCL 105. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-150 V Vakharia v Supreme General Film Exchange Co. Ltd. [1948] 18 Comp Cas 34 (Bom.). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-174 V. L. S. Finance Limited v Sunair Hotels Limited (2001) 4 Comp LJ 321: (2001) 44 CLA 207: (2002) 110 Comp Cas 772: (2001) 33 SCL 475 (CLB).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58-6 V. L. S. Finance v Union of India AIR 2013 SC 3182. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-25 V. N. Despande v. Arvind Mills Co. AIR (33) 1946 Bom 423. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69-6 V. P. Shrivastava v Indian Explosives Ltd [2010] 159 Comp Cas 529 (SC). . . . . . . 35-72, 35-90 V. Selvaraj v Mylapore Hindu Permanent Fund Ltd (1968) 38 Comp Cas 153 (Mad): (1968) 1 Comp LJ 92. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-116 V. V. Sivaram and others v. Foseco India Ltd. [2006] 133 Comp Cas 160 (Kar) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69-5, 69-8
cliv
Table of cases
V.B. Shalingam v Labour Officer (1986) 59 Comp Cas. 701(AP): (1986) 3 Comp. LJ 118 AP. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-105, 35-219 V.B. Sivalingam Chettiar v. Labour Officer [1986] 59Comp. Cas. 701 (AP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-194 V.R. Shelat v. P.J. Thakar [1975] 45 Comp Cas 43 (SC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-28 V.Raja Kumari v. P.Subbarama Naidu (2004) 8 SCC 774 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66-7 V.S. Krishnan v. Westfort Hi-Tech Hospital Ltd. (2008) 3 SCC 363. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66-15 Vagliano Anthracite Collieries Ltd., Re, (1910) 103 LT 211 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-24, 9-25, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27-11, 27-12 Vagliano Anthracite Collieries, Ltd., In re (1910) 1 KB 868 889.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27-12 Vaish Degree College v Lakshmi Narain AIR 1976 SC 888 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-52, 48-48 Vaishnav Shorilal Puri v Kishore Kundanlal Sippy [2004] 120 Comp Cas 681 (Bom): [2004] 60 CLA 433 (Bom): [2004] 58 CLA 298 (Bom) : [2005] 1 Comp LJ 407 (Bom); 2004 53 SCL 469 Bom. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-77 Vali Pattabhirama Rao v Sri Ramanuja Ginning & Rice Factory (P) Ltd. (1986) 60 Comp Cas 568 (AP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29-9 Valsamma Varghese v Kerala State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd 2010 CLC 222 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-172 Vandana Bidyut Chaterjee v. Union of India [2012] 171 Comp Cas 311 (Bom):[2012] 14 GSTR 267. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-37 Varadarajan (S) v Venkateswara Solvent Extraction P Ltd. (1994) 80 Comp Cas 693 (Mad): (1995) 4 Comp LJ 287: (1992) 9 CLA 39 (Mad) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-7 Vardhaman Dye-stuff Industries P. Ltd & Others, [2009] 149 Comp Cas 345 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-50 Vasant Investment Corporation Ltd v Official liquidator, Colaba Land & Mill Co Ltd. (1981) 51 Comp. Cas. 20 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-4, 39-21, 39-26, 39-47, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40-6, 40-13, 41-6, 41-7, 41-12 Vasudev Ramchandra Shelat v Pranlal Jayanand Thakar (1975) 45 Comp Cas 43 (SC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-24 Ved Prakash v Iron Traders (Private) Limited (1960) 31 Comp Cas 122:AIR 1960 Punj 427. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-142 Ved Prakash Wadhwani v Commissioner of Customs 2009 (233) ELT 356 (Trib). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-114 Venkataramana Devaru v. State of Mysore AIR 1958 SC 255. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25-11, 43-64 Venkateshwar Rao v. Government of Andhra Pradesh AIR 1966 Section 828. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25-11 Verma (B.M.) v State of UP (2005) 58 SCL 52 (All). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46-54 Verner v General Investment Trust (1894) 2 Ch 239. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-64 clv
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Viavi Solutions India P. Ltd. and others v Registrar of Companies, NCT of Delhi [2017] 203 Comp Cas 165. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-34 Vibank Housing Finance Ltd., In re (2006) 130 Comp Cas 705 (Karn). . . . . . . . . . . 1-7, 39-5 Vickers Sons and Maxim Ltd v Evans (1910) AC 444. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-62 Victoria Housing Estate Ltd. v Ashpurton Estates Ltd. (1982) 3 All ER 665, (1983) 3 Comp LJ 353 (CA) . . . . . . . . . . . 57-4, 57-9, 57-8, 57-11 Vidyawati v. State (1988) 3 Comp. LJ 117 (Delhi). . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-102, 35-193, 35-195 Vijay Bank v. Shyamal Kumar Lodh 2010 AIR SCW 4495.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-65 Vijay Kumar Chopra v Hind Samachar Ltd. (2001) 2 CLC 867: (2001) 40 CLA 313: (2002) 108 Comp Cas 115: (2001) 2 Comp LJ 133: (2001) 30 SCL 80 (CLB).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58-5 Vijay Narayan Thatte v State of Maharashtra 2009 AIR SCW 5353. . . . . . . . . . 44-33, 55-88 Vijayan Rajes v MSP Plantations P Ltd [2009] 151 Comp Cas 413 (Karn). . . . . . . . . . 55-90 Vijaykumar Berlia v. Union of India [1982] 52 Comp Cas 437. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56-16 Vijaywada Share Brokers Ltd v D Ramkishore [2007] 77 CLA 194 (CLB) . . . . . . . . . 49-45 Vijaywada Share Brokers Ltd v D Ramkishore. (2004) 120 Comp Cas 125 (CLB).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-54 Vinod Kumar Jain v Registrar of Companies (1987) 2 Comp LJ 188 (Del) . . . . . . . . . 43-49 Virendra Dressess v Varinder Garments (1982) 3 Comp LJ 212 (Del).. . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-21 Vishin N. Khanchandani v. Vidya Lachmandas Khanchandani [2000] 102 Comp Cas 340; 2000 AIR SCW 2932 (SC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-45 Vodafone Essar Gujrat Ltd In re [2011] 161 Comp Cas 144 (Guj) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41-3 Vodafone International Holdings B, V. v Union of India [2012] 170 Comp Cas 369 (SC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-26, 44-19, 50-22 Vodafone International Holdings B.V v. Union of India (2012) 6 SCC 613. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-36, 35-40, 44-48 Voith Paper GmbH v. R. Ramasamy [2011] 161 Comp Cas 427 (CLB) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58-8 Vujnovich v Vujnovich (1990) BCLC 227 (PC); (1989) 5 BCC 740 376. . . . . . . . . . . 55-76 W A Beardsell & Co (P) Ltd, In re (supra). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-42 W Foster & Son Ltd, Re, (1942) 12 Comp Cas 264 (Ch D).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-27, 35-62 W R Willcocks & Co, Re, (1973) 2 All ER 93. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-32 W. J. Hall & Co Limited, In re (1909) 1 Ch 521 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-32 W.A. Beardsell & Co P Ltd, Re, (1968) 38 Comp. Cas. (Mad). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-25 Wah Tat Bank Ltd and another v Chan Cheng Kum [1975] 2 All ER 257. . . . . . . . . . . 35-52 Wakley, Wakley v Vachell, Re, (1920) 2 Ch 205. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-43 Walchandnagar Industries Ltd v Ratanchand Khimch and Motishaw (1953) 23 Comp Cas 343 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25-12, 43-31 Walford Transport (Eastern) India Ltd. v. S.K. Mandal, Registrar of Companies and others [1980] 50 Comp Cas 600. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56-18 Walker v London Tramways Co (1879) 12 Ch D 705 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53-18 clvi
Table of cases
Wall v. London and Northern Assets Corporation (No.1) [1898] 2 Ch. 469, 484. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-87 Wallersteiner v Moir (No. 2) (1975) QB 373 (CA) a p 390.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34-10 Walter Symons, Ltd. In re (1934) Ch 86. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-31 Walters’ Deed of Guarantee, Re, [1933] Ch 321 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-17 Wamanlal Chhotalal Parekh v Scindia Steam Navigation Co. Ltd. (1944) 14 Comp Cas 69 (Bom): AIR 1944 Bom 131. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-15 Warranty Beardsell & Co. (P.) Ltd. & Mettur Industries Ltd., In re [1968] 38 Comp Cas 197 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-40 Watersheds Ltd v DaCosta [2010] Bus LR 1 (QB). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-29 Wartsila India Ltd., In re [2010] 160 Comp Cas 508 (Bom) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15-16 Waryam Singh v Eastern Commercial & Banking Co. Ltd. AIR 1926 Lah 414;. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-13 Wasava Tyres v Printers (Mysore) Ltd [2008] 86 CLA 455 (Kar). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-35 Watts v Midland Bank Plc (1986) BCLC 15.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34-10 Webb v Earle (1875) 20 Eq 557. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-42 Weeks v. Prpert (1873) LR 8 CD 427. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-165 Welsbach Incandescent Gas Light Co Ltd, Re, (1903) 1 Ch 87 (CA).. . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-138 Welton v Saffery (1897) AC 299.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-6, 11-33 West London Commercial Bank Ltd v Kitson (1884) 13 QBD J60 (CA). . . . . . . . . . 43-165 Westburn Sugar Refineries Ltd., In re [1951] 1 All E R 881 . . . . . . . . . . . 15-6, 15-14, 15-18 Western India Gunnies Pvt. Ltd. v Commercial Tax Officer (1990) 68 Comp Cas 673 (AP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-151 Western Maharashtra Development Corpn. Ltd v Bajaj Auto Limited [2010] 154 Comp Cas 593 (Bom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-36, 14-54, 21-35 Westfort Hi-Tech Hospital Ltd v V S Krishnan [2007] 137 Comp Cas 151; (2007) 2 Comp LJ 143; (2007) 76 SCL 185 (Ker). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-87, 55-55 Wharfedale Brewery Co Ltd, In re [1952] 2 All ER 635. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-33 White v Bristol Aeroplane Co Ltd (1953) 1 All ER 40 (CA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-141, 51-9 Willaire Systems Plc, Re, (1987) BCLC 56 (CA): (1986) 2 BCC 99,311. . . . . . . . . . . 50-85 William Anderson v Thomas Eales Rogers (1850) 1 Taylor and Bell 269 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-46, 21-44, 55-139 William Augustus Mahony v. East Holyford Mining Co Ltd [1876] 7 LR 869 (HL). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-92, 43-95 William Esplen Son & Swainston, Limited v Commissioners of Inland Revenue (1919) 2 KB 731.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-19, 30-35 William Grant & Sons Limited and Others v Mercer Limited [2010] CSOH 52. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-141, 49-41 Williams v Burgess (1840) 10 LJ QB 10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-22 Williams v Natural Life Health Foods Ltd, [1998] 2 All ER 577 (HL). . . . . . . . . . . . . 35-53 clvii
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Williams v. Burgess (1892) 1 QB 161 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62-6, 65-19 Wilson v Tumman (1843) 6 M & G 236.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60-5 Witbanks v. Selby 227 S.W. 371 (Texas) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62-6, 65-19 Wm. Passalacqua Builders, Inc. v. Resnick Developers S., Inc., 933 F.2d 131, 139 (2d Cir. 1991). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-46, 8-13 Wood Skinner & Co, In re [1945] 15 Comp Cas 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-30 Workmen of Associated Rubber Industries Ltd. v Associated Rubber Industry Ltd. (1986) 59 Comp Cas 134 (SC).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-8 World Wide Agencies (P) Ltd. v Margarat T Desor (Mrs.) (1990) 67 Comp Cas 607 (SC): AIR 1990 SC 737. . . . . 9-48, 9-53, 17-10, 55-3, 55-137, Worldwide Agencies [1990] 1 Comp. LJ 112 (Delhi) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-6 Wright & Greig Ltd In re (1911) 1 SLT 353. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40-10 Wright’s Case (1871) L.R. 12 Eq. 335n., 341n.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-87 Wuu Khek Chaing George v ECRC Land Pte Ltd [1999] 3 SLR 65 at 74 para 25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43-179 Y. K. Mathur v. Delhi Muncipality AIR 1974 DELHI 58 (V. 61, C. 13) . . . . . . . . . . . 43-134 Y.P. Das v Shimla Development Authority [1993] 3 Comp LJ 356. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68-8 Yallama Cotton, Woolen & Silk Mills Co Ltd. In re (1970) 40 Comp Cas 466 (Mys), . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-132 Yamuna Reddy v Sivaraman (B) (1992) 75 Comp Cas 199 (Mad).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64-21 Yenidje Tobacco Co Ltd, Re, [1916] 2 Ch 426.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-98, 55-100, 55-102 Yeung v Hong Kong & Shanghai Bank Ltd (1980) 2 All ER 599 (PC).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-100 Yianni v Edwin Evans & Sons [1981] 3 All ER 592 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-19 Yolland, Husson and Birkett Ltd. In re [1908] 1 Ch 152 (CA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57-21, 64-7 Young v Higgon 6M & W50-151 English Reports (Ex)317. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62-5, 65-19 Young v Ladies Imperial Club Ltd [1920] 2 KB 523. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-13 Zile Singh v. State of Haryana (2004) 8 SCC 1:AIR 2004 SC 5100: 2004 AIR SCW 5842). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-6 Zinottey Properties Ltd., Re, [1984] 3 All ER 754: [1984] BCLC 375:(1984) 1 BCC 99,139].. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-144
clviii
Chapter 1 Concepts of “company” Contents
Chapter 1 1.1
1.2
1.3
Page No.
Concepts of “company” .......................................................... 1-1 What do the concepts of ‘company’, ‘body corporate’, ‘corporation’ and ‘person’ contemplate in relation to companies registered under the Companies Act? ...................... 1-3 Distinct personality of a company - U. P. State Ind. Dev. Corp. Ltd v Monsanto Manufacturers Ltd [2015] 189 Comp Cas 69 (SC) : does it need reconsideration? ................. 1-16 Lawsuit by a company: does it need a specific authorisation? .......................................................................... 1-30
1-1
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
1-2
What do the concepts of ‘company’, ‘body corporate’, ‘corporation’ and ‘person’ contemplate in relation to companies registered under the Companies Act?
1.1 What do the concepts of ‘company’, ‘body corporate’, ‘corporation’ and ‘person’ contemplate in relation to companies registered under the Companies Act? Synopsis Introduction .......................................................................................................... 1-3 Attributes of corporate personality....................................................................... 1-9 Difference between incorporation of a company and constitution or establishment of a corporation ........................................................................... 1-10 Whether company is a ‘person’ ......................................................................... 1-12 Whether a company is a citizen ......................................................................... 1-14
INTRODUCTION The terms ‘company’ and ‘body corporate’ are used in the Companies Act 1956 (the ‘Act’) with different meanings. While every company registered under the Act is a body corporate, every, body corporate is not a company. In other words, besides companies registered under the Act, there are other bodies which are which are bodies corporate. The expression ‘company’ is defined in section 3(1)(i)1 as a company formed and registered under this Act or an existing company as defined in clause (ii). The Act defines the term ‘body corporate’ in section 2(7)2 and according to the definition the term “body corporate” or “corporation” includes a company incorporated outside India but does not include— (a)
1 2
a corporation sole;
See Section 2(20) of the Companies Act, 2013. See Section 2(11) of the Companies Act, 2013.
1-3
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
(b)
a co-operative society registered under any law relating to cooperative societies; and
(c)
any other body corporate (not being a company as defined in this Act), which the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, specify in this behalf.
It will be noticed that the terms ‘body corporate’ and ‘corporation’ are treated synonymously and hence they are interchangeable under the Act. However, apart from the Companies Act, the term ‘corporation’ is used in India in one more sense, namely a body corporate created, constituted or established under a special statue enacted by the Parliament or a State Legislature. A company incorporated under the Act is a body corporate is evident from section 34(2)3, which provides that “(2) From the date of incorporation mentioned in the certificate of incorporation, such of the subscribers of the memorandum and other persons, as may from time to time be members of the company, shall be a body corporate by the name contained in the memorandum, capable forthwith of exercising all the functions of an incorporated company, and having perpetual succession and a common seal, but with such liability on the part of the members to contribute to the assets of the company in the event of its being wound up as is mentioned in this Act.” In Fulham Football Club (1987) Ltd v Richards [2012] Bus LR 606, the Court of Appeal explained the concept as follows: “To state the very obvious, a company is a corporation in the common law sense formed by registration …. In the words of Ford, Austin and Ramsay in Ford’s Principles of Corporations Law, p 1061: ‘a corporation (or body corporate in the common law sense) is a legal device by which legal rights, powers, privileges, immunities, duties, liabilities and disabilities may be attributed to a fictional entity equated for many purposes to a natural person... The fictional entity acquires rights and liabilities by the acts of persons behind it.’ Upon incorporation, the Corporations Law applies to the new entity. Its company directors and management are subject to regulation under the Corporations Law. The Corporations Law contains provisions relating to the company’s constitution, general meetings of members, management of the company, the company’s dealings with other parties, the company’s financing, the handling of its affairs when it is subject to a financial crisis and, most significantly for present purposes, its winding up and dissolution. The Corporations Law controls by statutory force the creation and demise of the company; it
3
See Section 9 of the Companies Act, 2013.
1-4
What do the concepts of ‘company’, ‘body corporate’, ‘corporation’ and ‘person’ contemplate in relation to companies registered under the Companies Act?
oversees the birth, the life and death of the company. Such matters cannot and ought not be subject to private contractual arrangement.” The ordinary meaning of the term ‘body corporate’ is a person, association, or group of persons legally incorporated or corporation. That under the Act the two expressions “body corporate” and “corporation” are synonymous is evident from the conjunctive “or” used between them in section 2(7)4. In simple words, “body corporate” means an artificial ‘person’ created by law; a corporation. “Corporation” means a body corporate legally authorised to act as a single individual; an artificial person created by royal charter, prescription, or legislative act, and having the capacity of perpetual succession.5 The question whether a particular institution or body other than that specified in clause (7) of section 26 is a ‘body corporate’ under the said Act has to be decided with reference, among other things, to the status, mode of incorporation, constitution, etc. of the institution. It is not possible for the department to lay down any general definition other than that given in the Act or to furnish a list of bodies which are deemed to be ‘bodies corporate’ under section 2(7)7. Generally speaking, the department would consider that any corporate body, i.e. a body which has been or is incorporated under some statute and which has a perpetual succession, a common seal and is a legal entity apart from the members constituting it, will come within the definition of the term ‘body corporate’. The term will not, however, include a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, or any of the bodies which have been specifically excluded by sub-clauses (a), (b) and (c) of clause (7) of section 2.8 The main feature of a body corporate is that it is an entity, that is, being or existence, especially when considered as distinct, independent, or self-contained. This feature does exist in the case of a company registered under the Act and hence every company is body corporate. The Oxford Law & Business Electronic Dictionary defines ‘body corporate’ as corporation, an entity that has legal personality, i.e. it is capable of enjoying and being subject to legal rights and duties. It may be either a corporation aggregate or a corporation sole. A corporation aggregate (e.g. a company registered under the Companies Act) consists of a number of members who fluctuate from time to time. A corporation sole (e.g. the Crown) consists of one member only and his or her successors. The Corpus Juris Secundum (Volume 18, at p. 366) defines it as a corporation is a collection of natural persons joined together by their voluntary action or by legal 4 5 6 7 8
See Section 2(11) of the Companies Act, 2013. The Shorter Oxford English Dictionary, Vol. I. p. 429. See Section 2(11) of the Companies Act, 2013. See Section 2(11) of the Companies Act, 2013. MCA Circular No. 8/(26)/2(7)/63-PR, dated 13-3-1963.
1-5
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
compulsion, by or under the authority of an Act of the Legislature, consisting either of a special character or of a general permissive statute, to accomplish some purposes, pecuniary, ideal, or governmental authorised by the charter or governing statute, under a scheme or organization and by methods thereby prescribed or permitted with the faculty of having a continuous succession during the period prescribed by the Legislature for its existence, of having a corporate name by which it may make and take contracts, and sue and be sued, and with the faculty of acting as a unit in respect of all matters within the scope of the purpose for which it is created.9 According to the Halsbury’s Laws of England (4th edition, Volume 9, Paragraph 1201), body corporate means a corporation may be defined as a body of persons (in the case of a corporation aggregate) or an office (in the case of a corporation sole) which is recognised by the law as having a personality which is distinct from the separate personalities of the members of the body or the personality of the individual holder for the time being of the office in question.10 Juristic person (artificial person) is an entity, such as a corporation, that is recognised as having legal personality, i.e. it is capable of enjoying and being subject to legal rights and duties. It is contrasted with a human being, who is referred to as a natural person. A company registered under the Act falls in the second of these two categories of persons. The words ‘juristic person’ signify recognition of an entity to be in law a person, which otherwise it is not. In other words, it is not an individual natural person but an artificially created person, which is to be recognised to be in law as such. When a person is ordinarily understood to be a natural person, it only means a human person. Essentially, every human person is a person. A juristic person, like any other natural person is in law also conferred with rights and obligations and is dealt with in accordance with law. In other words, the entity acts like a natural person but only through a designated person, whose acts are processed within the ambit of law.11 A corporation may be defined as a body of persons (in the case of a corporation aggregate) or an office (in the case of a corporation sole) which is recognised by the law as having a personality which is distinct from the separate personalities of the members of the body or the personality of the individual holder for the time being of the office in question.12 The term “body corporate” is wider than the expression “company” and is used in several sections of the Act to denote not only a company incorporated in India but 9 10 11
12
Corpus Juris Secundum. Volume 18, at p. 366 Halsbury’s Laws of England, 4th edition, Volume 9, Paragraph 1201. Shiromani Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee, Amritsar v Shri Som Nath Dass 2000 AIR SCW 1394: AIR 2000 SC 1421. Halsbury’s Laws of England, 4th edn., volume 9, Paragraph 1201.
1-6
What do the concepts of ‘company’, ‘body corporate’, ‘corporation’ and ‘person’ contemplate in relation to companies registered under the Companies Act?
also a foreign company. It includes a corporation formed under any special law of India or a foreign country, except as expressly excluded by the definition. It includes all public financial institutions mentioned in section 4A13 of the Act as well as nationalised banks incorporated under section 3(4) of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970. However, it excludes a body corporate, which is not a company under the Act and which is specified by the Central Government in the notification in the Official Gazette.14 A corporation is an artificial being created by law having a legal entity entirely separate and distinct from the individuals who compose it with the capacity of continuous existence and succession, notwithstanding changes in its membership. In addition, it possesses the capacity as such legal entity of taking, holding and conveying property, entering into contracts, suing and being sued, and exercising such other powers and privileges as may be conferred on it by the law of its creation just as a natural person may.15 The following definition of a corporation was given in the celebrated Dartmouth College case:16 “A corporation is an artificial being, invisible, intangible and existing only in contemplation of law. Being, the mere creature of law it possesses only those properties which the charter of its creation confers upon it, either expressly or as incidental to its very existence. These are such as are supposed best calculated to effect the object for which it was created. Among the most important ones, immortality, and if the expression may be allowed, individuality; properties by which a perpetual succession of many persons are considered as the same, and may act as a single individual. They enable a corporation to manage its own affairs, and to hold property without the perplexing intricacies, the hazardous and endless necessity, of perpetual conveyances for the purpose of transmitting it from hand to hand. It is chiefly for the purpose of clothing bodies of men, in succession with these qualities and capacities, that corporations were invented and are in use. By these means a perpetual succession of individuals are capable of acting for the promotion of the particular object, like one immortal being.” Though the term ‘body corporate’ is of wide connotation, it does not include a corporation sole and a co-operative society. It also does not include any other body corporate notified by the Central Government. The Oil and Natural Gas
13 14 15
16
See Section 2(72) of the Companies Act, 2013 Vibank Housing Finance Ltd., In re (2006) 130 Comp Cas 705 (Karn). S. S. Dhanoa, Appellant v. Municipal Corporation, Delhi (1981) 3 SCC 431 (SC): AIR 1981 SC 1395. Dartmouth College v Woodward 17 U.S. (4 Wheat) 518.
1-7
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
Commission has been notified by the Government in this behalf.17 However, the ONGC has now been incorporated as a public company under the Companies Act, 1956 after the repeal of the Oil and Natural Gas Commission Act, 1959. A corporation has only one capacity, namely, the corporate capacity. On an analysis it would appear that the essential elements in the legal consent of a corporation are: (1) a continuous identity, i.e., The original member or members or his or their successors are one, (2) the persons to be incorporated, (3) the name by which the persons are incorporated, (4) a place, and (5) words sufficient in law to show incorporation. In law the individual incorporators are members of which it is composed or something wholly different from the corporation itself, for a corporation is a legal person just as much as an individual. A corporation aggregate can express its will be deed under a common seal. However, a law relating to the business of a corporation is not a law with respect to regulation of a corporation.18 As to the legal statue of a corporation established by or under an Act of Parliament, it was observed in Som Prakash Rekhi v. Union of India AIR 1981 SC 212: “A corporation is an artificial being, invisible, intangible, and existing only in the contemplation of the law. Being the mere creature of the law, it possesses only those properties which the charter of its creation confers on it either expressly, or as incidental to its very existence. Those are such as are supposed best calculated to effect the object for which it was created. Among the most important are immortality, and, if the expression be allowed, individuality; properties by which a perpetual succession of many persons are considered the same, and may act as a single individual. Although corporate personality is not a modern invention, its adaptation to embrace the wide range of industry and commerce has a modern flavour. Welfare States like ours called upon to execute many economic projects readily resort to this resourceful legal contrivance because of its practical advantages without a wee-bit of diminution in ownership and control of the Undertaking. The true owner is the State, the real operator is the State and the effective controllerate is the State and accountability for its actions to the community and to parliament is of the State. Nevertheless, a distinct juristic person with a corporate structure conducts the business, with the added facilities enjoyed by companies and keeping the quasi-autonomy which comes in handy from the point of view of business management. Be it remembered though, that while the formal ownership is cast in the corporate mould, the reality reaches down to State control.�
17 18
Notification No. GSR 1883, dated 20 December, 1965. S. P. Mittal v Union of India (1983) 1 SCC 51.
1-8
What do the concepts of ‘company’, ‘body corporate’, ‘corporation’ and ‘person’ contemplate in relation to companies registered under the Companies Act?
ATTRIBUTES OF CORPORATE PERSONALITY Personality means a person as an embodiment of a collection of qualities. Corporate personality is the personality of a corporation distinct from those of its members. Corporate personality is a reality and not an illusion or fictitious construction of the law. A corporation is a legal person. Indeed, ‘a legal person’ is any subject-matter other than a human being to which the law attributes personality. Corporations are one species19 of legal persons invented by the law and invested with a variety of attributes so as to achieve certain purposes sanctioned by the law. For those purposes, a corporation or company has a legal existence of its own.20 A company acquires the corporate personality on its birth by incorporation, i.e. when it comes into existence. A company comes into existence by registration at the office of the Registrar of Companies. Section 34(1)21 of the Act provides that on the registration of the memorandum of association of a company, the Registrar shall certify under his hand that the company has been incorporated. On registration of a company the Registrar gives a certificate called the Certificate of Incorporation, which is a document certifying that the company is incorporated. The validity of the incorporation cannot thereafter be challenged. According to section 34(2)22, from the date of incorporation mentioned in the certificate of incorporation, such of the subscribers to the memorandum and other persons, as may from time to time be members of the company, shall be a body corporate by the name contained in the memorandum, capable forthwith of exercising all the functions of an incorporated company, and having perpetual succession and a common seal, but with such limited liability on the part of the members to contribute to the assets of the company in the event of its being wound up as is mentioned in the Act:—
19 20 21 22
(a)
A corporation is an artificial being, invisible, intangible and existing only in contemplation of law;
(b)
It is created by the royal charter, prescription, or legislative act;
(c)
It may consist of a single person and his successors (in rare instances), being the incumbents of a particular office, but ordinarily, it will consist of an association of numerous individuals;
(d)
It has a personality which is distinct from the separate personalities of the members of the body;
A class of things having some common characteristics. Som Prakash Rekhi v Union of India (1981) 51 Comp Cas 71: (1981) 1 SCC 449: AIR 1981 SC 212. See Section 7 of the Companies Act, 2013. See Section 9 of the Companies Act, 2013.
1-9
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
(e)
Being a mere creature of law it possesses only those properties which the charter of its creation confers upon it, either expressly or as incidental to its very existence;
(f)
It has the capacity of perpetual succession during the period prescribed by the Legislature for its existence;
(g)
It has a corporate name by which it may make and take contracts, and sue and be sued;
(h)
It has the power of acting as a unit in respect of all matters within the scope of the purpose for which it is created.
A corporation is distinct from its contributories or shareholders.23 It is a legal person separate and distinct from the subscribers to the memorandum of association even if they consist of a family, one of whom holds all the shares, the others holding one share each.24 Its property does not belong to its shareholders, they have only a right to receive dividends in proportion to the shares held by them. It can contract on its behalf and the members are not personally entitled to the benefits or liable for the burdens arising there from. A company enjoys perpetual succession until it is legally dissolved. A company being a separate legal person, is unaffected by the death or other departure of any member but continues in existence. This is one of the most important attributes of a company. Even though a company is distinct from its members, the distinction is disregarded in certain cases where the separate corporate entity is used for tax evasion or to circumvent tax obligation or to perpetrate fraud.25
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN INCORPORATION OF A COMPANY AND CONSTITUTION OR ESTABLISHMENT OF A CORPORATION In Dalco Engineering Pvt Ltd v Satish Prabhakar Padhey (2010) 4 SCC 378, the Supreme Court has held that Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995, which defines the term “establishment” as “a corporation established by or under a Central, Provincial or State Act...”, a statutory corporation is established or brought into existence by or under statute, but a “company” is not “established” under the Act. An incorporated company does not “owe” its existence to the Act. An incorporated company is formed by the act of any seven or more persons (or two or more persons for a private company) associated for any lawful purpose subscribing their names to a memorandum of association and by complying with the requirements of the 23 24 25
Salomon v Salomon & Co. (1897) AC 22. Salomon v Salomon & Co. (1897) AC 22. Juggilal Kamlapat v CIT 1969 (1) SCR 988: AIR 1969 SC 932: (1969) 2 Comp LJ 188: (1969) 73 ITR 702.
1-10
What do the concepts of ‘company’, ‘body corporate’, ‘corporation’ and ‘person’ contemplate in relation to companies registered under the Companies Act?
Companies Act in respect of registration. A “company” is ‘incorporated and registered’ under the Act and not ‘established’ under the Act. The Supreme Court amplified the point by observing: “Where the definition of ‘establishment’ uses the term ‘a corporation established by or under an Act’, the emphasis should be on the word ‘established’ in addition to the words ‘by or under’. The word ‘established’ refers to coming into existence by virtue of an enactment. It does not refer to a company, which, when it comes into existence, is governed in accordance with the provisions of the Companies Act. But then, what is the difference between ‘established by a central Act’ and ‘established under a central Act’? The difference is best explained by some illustrations. A corporation is established by an Act, where the Act itself establishes the corporation. For example, Section 3 of State Bank of India Act, 1955 provides that a Bank to be called the State Bank of India shall be constituted to carry on the business of banking. Section 3 of Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956 provides that with effect from such date as the Central Government may by notification in the Official Gazette appoint, there shall be established a corporation called the Life Insurance Corporation of India. State Bank of India and Life Insurance Corporation of India are two examples of corporations established by “a Central Act”. We may next refer to the State Financial Corporation Act, 1951 which provides for establishment of various Financial Corporations under that Act. Section 3 of that Act relates to establishment of State Financial Corporations and provides that the State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette establish a Financial Corporation for the State under such name as may be specified in the notification and such Financial Corporation shall be a body corporate by the name notified. Thus, a State Financial Corporation is established under a central Act. Therefore, when the words “by and under an Act” are preceded by the words “established”, it is clear that the reference is to a corporation established, that it is brought into existence, by an Act or under an Act. In short, the term refers to a statutory corporation as contrasted from a non-statutory corporation incorporated or registered under the Companies Act.” The Supreme Court’s later judgment, Bharat Steel Tubes Ltd v IFCI Ltd 2011 AIR SCW 2273, stands in conflict with the one in Dalco Engineering (supra) in as much as it was observed that IFCI Ltd (a company registered under the Companies Act) was ‘constituted’ under the Companies Act which was a Central Act and therefore it could be treated as a financial institution under section 4A(2)(i) of the Act according to which an institution “established or constituted by or under any Central Act” is a financial institution.
1-11
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
WHETHER COMPANY IS A ‘PERSON’ This question is raised in many contexts. The expression ‘person’ has been defined under section 3(42) of General Clauses Act, 1897. According to this definition the expression ‘person’ includes ‘any company or association or body of individuals, whether incorporated or not’. As may be seen, this definition is very wide so as to include even an unincorporated company or body or association of individuals. Therefore, it cannot be doubted that a company incorporated under the Act will fall within this definition. At the same time it can also be concluded that unless a particular statute specifically stipulates to the contrary, an incorporated company can perform every legal transaction which any other ‘person’ is authorised to perform. The word ‘person’ includes both a natural person (a human being), whether a man, woman or child and an artificial person (a corporation).26 The word “person” would include both natural as well as juristic persons. According to Section 41 any person can become a member. The word ‘person’ is not defined in the Act. The term ‘person’ shall include any company or association or body of individuals, whether incorporated or not.27 It, thus, follows that a company registered under the Companies Act or any other body corporate can become a member of a company.28 A company may become a member of another company, if the former is authorised by its Memorandum of Association to take shares; or if it takes the shares in payment of a debt by way of compromise.29 But a company cannot acquire its own shares, even if expressly authorised so to do by its memorandum.30 Similarly, a subsidiary body corporate cannot be a member of a holding company and any allotment of such shares to it shall be void subject to certain exceptions.31 A registered trade union under the Trade Unions Act, 1926 is a “person” within meaning of section 41(2) of Companies Act and, thus, can be registered as a member as well as hold shares in its own name.32 In Karnataka Power Transmission Corpn. Ltd. v. Ashok Iron Works Pvt. Ltd 2009 AIR SCW 1502, the Supreme Court held that Section 2 (1)(m) of the Consumer Protection Act 1986, which enumerates four categories namely, (i) a firm whether 26
27 28
29 30 31 32
Pharmaceutical Society v London & Provincial Supply Association (1880) 5 AC 857; Arjun Prasad AIR 1962 SC 1192. General Clauses Act, 1897, section 3(42). Balkrishna Gupta v Swadeshi Polytex Ltd. (1985) 58 Comp Cas 563 (SC): AIR 1985 SC 520: (1985) 2 SCC 167: (1985) 2 SCR 854:(1985) 2 Comp LJ 1 (SC). Re, Lands Allotments Co. (1894) 1 Ch 616. Trevor v Whitworth (1887) 12 App Cas 409. See section 77 of Companies Act, 1956. As per section 42, post. All India Bank Officer’s Confederation v Dhanalakashmi Bank Ltd.(1997) 90 Comp Cas 225: (1997) 13 SCL 6: (1997) 26 CLA 33 (CLB)(Chennai).
1-12
What do the concepts of ‘company’, ‘body corporate’, ‘corporation’ and ‘person’ contemplate in relation to companies registered under the Companies Act?
registered or not; (ii) a Hindu undivided family; (iii) a co-operative society; and (iv) every other association of persons whether registered under the Societies Registration Act, (1860) or not while defining ‘person’ cannot be held to be restrictive and confined these four categories as it is not said in terms that ‘person’ shall mean one or other of the things which are enumerated, but that it shall ‘include’ them. Section 2(1)(m), is an interpretation clause, and must have been intended by the Legislature to be taken into account in construing the expression ‘person’ as it occurs in Section 2(1)(d). While defining ‘person’ in Section 2(1)(m), the Legislature never intended to exclude a juristic person like company. In Shiromani Gurdwara Prabhandak Committee v Shri Som Nath Das (2000) 4 SCC 146;2000 AIR SCW 1094 the Supreme Court explained the term ‘juristic person’ as follows: “The very words “Juristic Person” connote recognition of an entity to be in law a person which otherwise it is not. In other words, it is not an individual natural person but an artificially created person which is to be recognised to be in law as such.” In Union Bank of India v. Khader International Construction AIR 2001 SC 2277;2001 AIR SCW 2045;(2001) 105 Comp Cas856, it was held that a suit by indigent person can be maintained by a company as the words ‘person’ in Order 33, Rule 1 of Civil Procedure Code 1908 includes not only natural person but other judicial persons also; thus public limited company, otherwise entitled to maintain suit as legal person can maintain an application under O. 33, R. 1. The plea that in view of the provision under O. 33 the word ‘person’ has to be understood to mean a natural person, otherwise a company would not be in a position to present the application, is not be tenable. A company being a juristic person, it would be represented by a person competent to represent it. Lord Selborne in Pharmaceutical Society v. London and Provincial Supply Association (1880) 5 App Cas 857, observed: “There can be no question that the word ‘person’ may and......prima facie does, in a public statute include a person in law; that is, a corporation, as well as a natural person. But although that is a sense which the word will bear in law, and which as I said, perhaps ought to be attributed to it in the construction of a statute unless there should be any reason for a contrary construction, it is never to be forgotten, that in its popular sense and ordinary use it does not extend so far.” Therefore, the word ‘person’ has to be given its meaning in the context in which it is used. It refers to a person who is capable of filing a suit and this being a benevolent provision, it is to be given an extended meaning.
1-13
Compendium of key issues under corporate law
WHETHER A COMPANY IS A CITIZEN A citizen means a native or a naturalized person of a state or a nation who owes his or her allegiance to its government and is entitled to its protection (distinguished from alien). Under the Constitution of India, citizens are entitled to certain fundamental rights. For example, according to Article 19 the Constitution, citizens are entitled to protection of certain rights regarding freedom of speech and expression, etc. These rights are available only to citizens. It is now settled that the rights prescribed by Article 19 are available only to natural persons who are citizens, and that a company, not being a citizen as defined in the Citizenship Act, 1955, cannot claim any of the rights included in Article 19. However, a company can claim other fundamental rights which are not limited only to citizens but are available to all ‘persons’ including companies. (We have seen already that, a company is a person). The Supreme Court has held that although a company is a legal person, yet the members who form the incorporated company do not pool their status or their personality into the company. If all of them are citizens of India, the company does not become a citizen of India. The personality of the members has little to do with the persona (an aspect of the personality as shown to or perceived by others) of the incorporated company. The persona that comes into being is not the aggregate of the personae either in law or in metaphor. The corporation really has no physical existence; it is but a mere abstraction of law. A company or corporation is not a citizen within the meaning of Article 19 of the Constitution and cannot ask for the enforcement of the fundamental rights granted to the citizens by that Article. A company may have a nationality but it cannot have a citizenship.33 The effect of confining Article 19 to citizens as distinguished from persons, to whom other Articles like Article 14 apply, is that it is only citizens to whom the rights under Article 19 are guaranteed. A company or corporation not being a citizen cannot avail of the benefit of the protection under Article 19 and also cannot file a petition under Article 32 of the Constitution on the ground, that in substance the company or the corporation is nothing more than an association of shareholders. 34 The Supreme Court held that a Government company, eg. Shipping Corporation of India Ltd cannot claim to be a citizen of India, and as such, is not entitled to rely upon Article 19. Similarly foreign companies are not citizens and are therefore not entitled to claim the fundamental rights under Article 19.35 A company being an artificial legal person cannot claim the benefit of the rights under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution though its managing director can do so.36 33
34 35 36
State Trading Corporation of India v Commercial Tax Officer AIR 1964 SC 1811:[1963] 33 Comp Cas 1057 (SC). Tata Engineering & Locomotive Co Ltd v State of Bihar AIR 1964 SC 40. British India Steam Navigation Co Ltd v Jasjit Sing AIR 1964 SC 1451. Barium Chemicals Ltd v Company Law Board AIR 1967 SC 295.
1-14
What do the concepts of ‘company’, ‘body corporate’, ‘corporation’ and ‘person’ contemplate in relation to companies registered under the Companies Act?
In another case, known as the Bank Nationalisation case, the Supreme Court held that where the legislative measures directly touch the company of which the petitioner is a shareholder, he can petition on behalf of the company, if by the impugned action, his rights are also infringed. In this case, the court entertained a petition under Article 32 of the Constitution at the instance of a director and shareholder of a company and granted relief. It is, therefore, to be noted that an individual’s right is not lost by reason of the fact that he is a shareholder of the company.37 The Supreme Court extended the principle laid down in R C Coopers case and held that a shareholder of a company is entitled to protection under Article 19 of the Constitution. The individual right under that article of the Constitution is not lost by reason of the fact that he is a shareholder of the company. So the fundamental rights of shareholders are not lost when they associate to form a company. When the fundamental rights of shareholders are impaired by State action their rights are protected. The reason is that the shareholders’ rights are equally and necessarily affected if the rights of the company are affected. The rights of the shareholders under Articles 19(1)(a) are protected and maintained by newspapers owned and controlled by the shareholders through the medium of a company. Therefore the shareholders of the company can seek protection of that right.38 The effect of the above development of the case law is that when any fundamental right of a company as well as of a shareholder of a company is violated, the company alone cannot seek redressal, but it can do so through its shareholders.
37 38
R C Cooper v Union of India AIR 1970 1 SC 564. Bennet Coleman & Co v Union of India AIR 1973 SC 564; See also Delhi Cloth & General Mills Co Ltd v Union of India AIR 1983 SC 937:[1983] 5 Comp Cas 674.
1-15