Company Law India: Read latest Company law news & updates, acts, circular, notifications & articles issued by MCA amendment in companies Act 2013. Article on Loans Company formation XBRL, Schedule VI IFRS.
Company Law : Learn about the legal procedures for director resignation and removal under the Companies Act, 2013, including compliance with ROC...
Company Law : Understand the process and requirements for converting an unlisted public company into an LLP, including necessary filings and doc...
Company Law : Understand if Form SH-7 is required during the conversion of CCPS to equity shares under the Companies Act, 2013, based on the aut...
Company Law : Learn about Section 203 of the Companies Act, its applicability to private companies, key provisions, and exceptions for companies...
Company Law : Understand stamp duty rules on share transfers in demat form for private limited companies. Covers legal framework, rates, respons...
Company Law : The Government acknowledges MCA-21 glitches, highlights improvements, ensures data security, and implements new features for bette...
Company Law : The Indian government has reduced reporting forms for companies on unclaimed dividends and integrated fund transfers with Bharatko...
Company Law : MCA21 portal saw 80.26 lakh form filings between April 2024 and January 2025, showcasing improved security, user experience, and s...
Company Law : Summary of NFRA's audit quality inspection of Lodha & Co., highlighting key deficiencies in audit documentation, independence poli...
Company Law : NFRA's 2023 inspection of M/s BSR & Co. LLP highlighted improvements in audit practices, independence policies, and documentation ...
Company Law : NCLAT Delhi held that trusteeship deeds are generally signed between the trust on behalf of the lenders and the personal/ corporat...
Company Law : NCLAT Delhi held that CoC decision to liquidate the Corporate Debtor is acceptable as corporate debtor has no assets and thus CIRP...
Company Law : Delhi HC examines NFRA's jurisdiction in issuing show-cause notices to Engagement Quality Control Reviewers (EQCRs) under Section ...
Company Law : The view that NCLT had no jurisdiction to entertain Section 95 Application filed by the Financial Creditor and the Application oug...
Company Law : NCLAT Delhi held that as per expressed provisions of section 101(1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 moratorium period ...
Company Law : Infracx Developers Pvt Ltd penalized for delayed INC-20A filing under Section 10A of the Companies Act, 2013. Total penalty: ₹43...
Company Law : Godrej Tyson Foods Ltd. penalized for failing to appoint a woman director under Section 149(1) of the Companies Act. Penalty inclu...
Company Law : NFRA imposes Rs. 5 lakh penalty and 5-year debarment on CA Neeraj Bansal for professional misconduct during Religare Finvest Ltd's...
Company Law : MCA penalizes Chandrabangshi Nidhi Ltd for violating Section 118(1) of the Companies Act, 2013, due to failure to maintain meeting...
Company Law : United Technologies faces penalties for non-appointment of company secretary under the Companies Act, with fines for company and d...
I had to concentrate on an interesting legal issue in the recent past on section 397/398 of the Companies Act, 1956. Though, section 397/398 of the Companies Act, 1956 is basically meant to protect the rights of the minority shareholders in the Company against the oppression and mismanagement by the majority, the rights of the third parties can not be ignored. The Company Law Board can pass any order under section 397/398 of the Companies Act, 1956 and under section 402 of the Act in order to put an end to the matters complained of or in order to regulate the affairs of the Company.
It is known that resolving the disputes between or among the shareholders in a closely held company is very difficult in the absence of any settlement between or among the parties. Now a day, based on the practice of entertaining petitions under section 397/398 of the Companies Act, 1956 without looking into sheer technicalities, a shareholder/s who is qualified to approach Company Law Board under section 399 of the Companies Act, 1956 and who has a grievance with the other shareholders prefers to file a Petition under section 397/398 of the Companies Act, 1956. It is known that as adjudicating a company dispute requires specialization and also a traditional Civil Court may not speedily dispose a Company dispute and may not go beyond the brief. In view of the difficulties in approaching the traditional Civil Court though a Civil Court can be approached at times in respect of the grievances in the Company, many prefer to approach the Company Law Board.
Settling or putting an end to the disputes among shareholders by the Company Law Board under section 397/398 of the Companies Act, 1956 is a complicated job. When where exist serious difference of opinion among the minority and majority shareholders in a Private Limited Company, it would really be difficult for the Company Law Board to put an end to the matters complained of or to regularize the affairs of the Company.
India Inc may heave a sigh of relief with the corporate affairs ministry unlikely to make it compulsory for companies to spend 2 per cent of their net profits towards corporate social responsibility as recommended by the Parliamentary standing commit
The Companies Bill 2009 has dealt with independent directors quite extensively. The Standing Committee has spent significant time on issues relating to independent directors as evident from the report of the Committee. This shows the criticality of the effectiveness of independent directors in corporate governance.
It is also confirmed that the appointed director (s) whose particulars are given above, has given a declaration to the company that he/she has not been declared as proclaimed offender by any Economic Offence Court or Judicial Magistrate Court or High Court or any other Court.
The principal rules were published tide number G.S.R. 649(E), dated the 19th October. 2006 and were last amended vide number (3.S.K. 765(E). dated 29th March, 7007.
Decision of a company has to rest on views of majority; in case of disagreement by the minority, remedy lies u/s 397 & 398 and not in Civil Court. When a case falls within four corners of section 397 and/or section 398, ordinary civil court’s jurisdiction would stand barred to deal with such a dispute
These appeals arise from the order dated 30.3.2004 of the Madras High Court in WP No. 2198/2003 filed by the President of Madras Bar Association (MBA for short) challenging the constitutional validity of Chapters 1B and 1C of the Companies Act, 1956(`Act’ for short) inserted by Companies (Second Amendment) Act 2002 (`Amendment Act’ for short
The Petitioners herein filed Company Petition No.69 of 2006 before the Additional Principal Bench of the Company Law Board at Chennai under Sections 397, 398, 402 and 403 of the Companies Act, 1956, alleging mismanagement and oppression by the majority shareholders of the first respondent Company. Various reliefs, including reconstitution of the Board
