RUMA PAL, ARIJIT PASAYAT, C.K.THAKKER
Technip S. A. – Appellant
Versus
SMS Holding (Private) LTD. – Respondent
Judgment
Ruma Pal, J.—There are five main protagonists in these appeals, the appellant, Technip, a company incorporated in France, Coflexip, also incorporated in France, the Institut Francais du Petrol (referred to as IFP) which through its subsidiary ISIS, a company incorporated in France, was a shareholder in Technip and Coflexip, South East Asia Marine Engineering and Construction Ltd. (referred to as SEAMEC), a company incorporated and registered in India and finally the respondents who are the shareholders of SEAMEC. SEAMEC is a subsidiary of Coflexip in the sense that Coflexip through a chain of wholly owned subsidiaries controls the majority shareholding in SEAMEC.
2. The question which arises for consideration in these appeals is whether Technip acquired control of SEAMEC through Coflexip in April, 2000, or in July, 2001? There is no dispute that if Technip controls Coflexip then it also controls SEAMEC and if there has been a change of control of SEAMEC then Technip would be bound to offer to purchase the shares of the minority shareholders in SEAMEC in accordance with the provisions of the Securities And Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeov
Hazard Brothers & Co. v. Midland Bank Ltd., 1933 AC 289
Metliss v. National Bank of Greece & Athens
In re Langleys Settlement Trusts
Lazard Brothers & Co. v. Midland Bank Ltd.
Smt. Surinder Kaur Sandhu v. Harbax Singh Sandhu
Commissioner of Income Tax, West Bengal v. East Coast Commercial Co. Ltd.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.