This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.
Proviso to Section 167(1)(a) mandating Vacation of Directorship is valid: HC
Case Law Details
- Case Name
- G. Vasudevan Vs Union of India (Madras High Court)
- Appeal Number
- Only available for paid members
- Date of Judgement/Order
- Only available for paid members
- Courts
- All High Courts, Madras High Court
Upgrade to Basic or Premium to download.
Already Upgraded? Log in.
G. Vasudevan Vs Union of India (Madras High Court)
Section 167 of the Companies Act as stated earlier gives instances where the office of a Director shall become vacant. Section 167(1)(a) states that if a Director incurs any disqualification specified in Section 164, then he vacates his seat as a The proviso which is under challenge in the instant writ petition states that, when a company commits a default as stipulated in sub-section 2 of Section 164, then a Director of such defaulting company does not vacate the post in the company in which the default is committed but a Director of such a c...
