SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2008 Supreme(SC) 1800

S.H.KAPADIA, AFTAB ALAM
Chembra Orchard Produce Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Regional Director of Company Affairs – Respondent


ORDER

Leave granted.

The short question which arises for determination in these Civil Appeals is whether an application filed by the Company under Section 391 (1) of the Companies Act, 1956 (for short the `1956 Act') seeking directions to convene a meeting of creditors and members to consider a scheme of amalgamation is required to be heard and decided ex-parte as per Rule 67 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959?

To answer the above question we need to quote hereinbelow the relevant Rules.

"Rule 2(9) `Judge's summons' means a summons returnable before the Judge in Chambers or in Court.

67. Summons for directions to convene a meeting.- An application under section 391(1) for an order convening a meeting of creditors and/ or members or any class of them shall be by a Judge's summons supported by an affidavit. A copy of the proposed compromise or arrangement shall be annexed to the affidavit as an exhibit thereto. Save as provided in rule 68 hereunder, the summons shall be moved ex parte. The summons shall be in Form No. 33, and the affidavit in support thereof in Form No. 34.

68. Service on company- Where the company is not the applicant, a copy of the summons and of the affidavit shall














































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top