The Companies Act is a legislation that governs the formation, functioning, and management of companies. Explore the key provisions, compliance requirements, and legal framework under the Companies Act.
Company Law : The issue revolves around the complexities in transferring shares without nomination. The framework allows direct vesting of share...
Company Law : The issue examines whether delayed adjustment of advances automatically triggers deposit classification. The key takeaway is that ...
Company Law : The procedure outlines steps for altering the Memorandum of Association, including board approval, shareholder resolution, and reg...
Company Law : The Bill decriminalises minor offences by converting them into civil penalties, reducing fear of prosecution for procedural lapses...
Company Law : The amendment merges 11 forms into two streamlined frameworks to reduce compliance burden. The key takeaway is faster, simpler com...
Company Law : NFRA introduced guidelines to evaluate audit firms’ compliance and quality control systems. The framework emphasizes governance,...
Company Law : ICSI highlights delays in marking defective forms by RoCs under CCFS 2026. It urges MCA to mandate time-bound processing or allow ...
Company Law : The issue is ambiguity in filing authority during liquidation. ICSI has requested clarity to enable liquidators to maintain statut...
Company Law : The initiative addresses inefficiencies in the current filing system and proposes consolidation and automation. It highlights a sh...
Company Law : The MCA introduced a streamlined process for updating registered email IDs of companies and LLPs. The update ensures seamless rece...
Company Law : Legal Analysis and Narrative Brief: Dale and Carrington Investment Pvt. Ltd. and Another v. P.K. Prathapan and Others (Supreme Cou...
Company Law : The case examined whether Tribunal approval was required for extending preference share redemption. It was held that such extensio...
Company Law : The Tribunal held that allegations of siphoning ₹30 lakh were not supported by any evidence tracing funds to the respondent. Mer...
Company Law : The Court held that a separate meeting of sub-class shareholders is not required when identical terms are offered to the entire cl...
Company Law : Supreme Court held that section 66 of the Companies Act, 2013 doesn’t require mandatory obtaining or circulating of formal valua...
Corporate Law : The order permits single judicial members to handle procedural and uncontested matters. It ensures faster case disposal while pres...
Company Law : A director was penalized for holding two DINs in violation of statutory provisions. The key takeaway is that even inadvertent non-...
Company Law : The company failed to conduct the required number of board meetings and exceeded statutory time gaps. The key takeaway is that str...
Company Law : Filing incorrect details in statutory forms attracts penalties even if later corrected. The key takeaway is that rectification doe...
Company Law : The case involved non-maintenance of a functional registered office, evidenced by undelivered official communication. The authorit...
Law governing the rights of the minority, the propriety of the majority and the protection given to the shareholders under section 397/398 of the Act, is always very interesting and also complicated. There are many interesting and complicated issues under section 397/398 of the Companies Act, 1956.
Corporate Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid today said the Registrar of Companies has to judge if Rendezvous Sports had violated any procedures in its foray into the Indian Premier League cricket. “That is not for me to judge. If there are any violations, these are to be judged by the Registrar of Companies as they are the ones who monitor companies and it is their jurisdiction,” Khurshid told reporters here.
As we all aware, section 397/398 of the Companies Act, 1956 deals with oppression and mismanagement and the protection to the minority against the majority. The law makers could not have expected that a situation will come where a majority are harassed or oppressed by the minority. Sections 397/398 and other connected provisions of companies act, 1956 meant to provide relief to the minority shareholders against the majority when minority are oppressed or the property of the company is mismanaged.
THE new companies bill 2009 will take a special approach to second and third generation family members joining the family run companies after their studies, the union minister of state for corporate affairs, Salman Khurshid said here on Saturday.
“The new Companies Act is already placed on the table of the House. A committee has been constituted … We are very hopeful that within 3-4 months we will have a new Companies Act,” Ministry of Corporate Affairs Secretary, R Bandyopadhyay, said at a function here.
The issue of impleading legal representatives of a deceased party to a proceeding under section 397/398 of Companies Act, 1956 stands on a different footing to that of a normal Civil Suit. In a normal Civil Suit before a Civil Court, it is the rule that the legal representatives of a deceased person to be impleaded in the proceeding.
A regulatory co-ordination committee of the government will rethink a key change to the definition of ‘vanishing company’, which could have watered down the law in respect of such companies. According to the new rule, an entity cannot be called a ‘vanishing company’ if any of its directors — executive or non-executive — can be traced at a later date.
The Companies Bill, 2009 has not proposed any upper cap on the number of independent directors, but, sub-clause (3) of clause 132 of the Companies Bill, 2009 provides that at least one-third of total directors shall be independent directors to be appointed in every listed company having certain amount of paid up capital to be prescribed by the Central Government.
Share transfers: We all know the settled law that the Private Company can have restrictions in its Articles restricting the right of its shareholders in transferring the shares. There can not be any such restriction in the articles of Public Companies as it is expressly prohibited under law. The Private Company can refuse to register the transfer or transmission of shares on certain grounds and the scope of refusal of registration of transfer or acceptance of transfer are very limited in Public Companies as everybody knows.
Government on Thursday said it has prosecuted over 13,000 companies during the three years ending 2008-09 for not following the provisions of the Companies Act. “As many as 13,437 companies were prosecuted for non-compliance of provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, during the last three years–2006-07 to 2008-09,” Corporate Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid told the Lok Sabha.
