Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 5 of 5 (0.23 seconds)Section 393 in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Section 394 in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Miheer H. Mafatlal vs Mafatlal Industries Ltd on 11 September, 1996
11. In my view, it will not be sufficient for the objector to plead across the Bar that the share exchange ratio was not appropriate or proper. The objector has failed to disclose as to how the share exchange ratio is not proper^ Similarly, the objector does not point out to the court any alternative valuation on the basis of which he can submit that the share exchange ratio was not correct or proper. A similar submission came to be made before the Supreme Court in Miheer H. Mafatlal's case (supra) and the Supreme Court in its Judgment repelled that contention holding thus :
All India Blue Star Employees ... vs M/S. Blue Star Limited on 1 March, 2000
9. This distinction was noticed in a Judgment of a Division Bench of this Court consisting of my learned brothers Mr. Justice B.N. Srikrishna and Mr. Justice S. Radhakrishnan in All India Blue Star Employees Federation v. Blue Star Ltd [2000] 27 SCL 265 (Bom.). In the Judgment of the Division Bench delivered on 1-3-2000 this court made a reference to the said distinction in paragraphs 15 and 16 of the judgment. This Court held as follows :
1