Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

15] Mr. Salve and most of the other learned counsel for the petitioners and intervenors, submit that the Central Government has misconstrued the scope of the expression 'interests of member' in Section 396 so as to altogether exclude the economic value of the shareholding. They submit that the expression, in the context of listed companies like FTIL would include the entire package of rights and interests associated with such shares. They submit that the compulsory amalgamation of FTIL having net worth of Rs.2800 crores with NSEL having putative liabilities of Rs.5600 crores is bound to drastically reduce the book value of FTIL's shares. The resultant company will never be in a position to compensate shareholders of FTIL for such losses. Therefore, the only reasonable construction of Section 396 is to permit compulsory amalgamation of two or more healthy companies. To explain the scope of the expression 'interests of member' in Section 396, they rely on Life Insurance Corporation of India vs. Escorts & Ors.10, Hindustan Lever Employee's Union vs. Hindustan Lever Ltd. & Ors.11 and Dwarkadas Shrinivas vs. The Sholapur Spinning and Weaving Co Ltd.12.