Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

In Re: Mercury Containers (P.) Ltd.

Type Court Judgment Court Allahabad Decided Apr 07, 2008
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/493723

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Allahabad High Court
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Company

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

- INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 [C.A. No. 45/1860]. Section 302; [M.C. Jain, R.C. Deepak & K.K. Misra, JJ] Murder Plea as to accused being minor School register and transfer certificate not proved before Court according to law Held, It has to be ignored and question of age is to be determined on other evidence and cir...

Key legal issue
Company

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

In Re: Mercury Containers (P.) Ltd.

Advocate Sri. Rohit Agrawal

Legal References

Reported In
[2010]98SCL43(All)

Excerpt

- indian penal code, 1860 [c.a. no. 45/1860]. section 302; [m.c. jain, r.c. deepak & k.k. misra, jj] murder plea as to accused being minor school register and transfer certificate not proved before court according to law held, it has to be ignored and question of age is to be determined on other evidence and circumstances surfacing on record. age determined on the basis of x-ray plates and report prepared by c.m.o., is the correct age of accused. accused was declared to be child on the date of commission of offence of murder. however, considering fact that now accused was around 41 years, he cannot be sent to approved school. accused was directed to pay fine of rs.25,000/- under section 302 i.p.c., amount of fine was directed to be paid as compensation to wife of deceased. mohammad - the objection in respect of ratio of exchange of shares has also been explained before the authorities (official liquidator). thus, there being no objection and the court being satisfied that the scheme of arrangement of demerger is in the interest of the shareholders/creditors of the three companies, the scheme of arrangement of demerger, filed as annexure no......that ratio of exchange of shares has not been disclosed.2. vide order dated 26-3-2008 sri rohit agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioner was directed to disclose the relationship between m/s. seth batra and associates, chartered accountant, and the directors in the demerged company. a supplementary affidavit has been filed in which it has been stated that umesh batra and associates (the directors) have no relationship with seth batra associates, chartered accountants.3. i have heard sri rohit agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioner and have perused the averments made in the petition as also the scheme of arrangement of the demerged company. in spite of the advertisements having been made in two newspapers nobody has come forward to file any objection. the objection in respect of ratio of exchange of shares has also been explained before the authorities (official liquidator). thus, there being no objection and the court being satisfied that the scheme of arrangement of demerger is in the interest of the shareholders/creditors of the three companies, the scheme of arrangement of demerger, filed as annexure no. 1 to the petition, stands approved. let a formal order be issued within three weeks.4. the petition stands disposed of. the petitioners shall also comply with all the statutory requirements within a month.

Full Judgment

R.K. Agrawal, J.

1. The present petition has been filed under Section 391/394 of the Companies Act, 1956 by M/s. Mercury Containers (P.) Ltd., hereinafter referred to as the Demerged Company, Mercury Industries Ltd. and Mercury Wires (P.) Ltd. seeking confirmation of scheme of arrangement filed as Annexure No. 1 to the petition. They had approached this Court by means of Company Application No. 12 of 2007 for convening a meeting of the creditors of the Demerged Company on which this Court vide order dated 18-12-2007 had appointed Sri V.K. Dixit, Advocate, failing him Sri Pratik J. Nagar, Advocate, as Chairman of the creditors meeting convened on 19-1-2008 and directed that the report of the result thereof be submitted to this Court. The meeting was held on 19-1-2008, as scheduled, and Sri V.K. Dixit, Advocate, Chairman, submitted the report that in the meeting the creditor have unanimously resolved that the proposed Scheme of Demerger of the Demerged Company be approved without any modification. Upon presentation of the present petition the Court vide order dated 30-1-2008 directed publication in the same two newspapers (The Times of India, Kanpur Edition and Amar Ujala, Kanpur Edition) as also notices to the Official Liquidator and the Regional Director, Department of Company Affairs, PDIL Bhawan, New India Oil Circle, Sector-I, Noida. Notices have been published in two newspapers and an affidavit has also been filed enclosing copies of the newspapers. The Official Liquidator has submitted his report. He does not have any objection. However, Regional Director, North Region, Ministry of Corporate Affairs, Noida only has objected that ratio of exchange of shares has not been disclosed.

2. Vide order dated 26-3-2008 Sri Rohit Agrawal, learned Counsel for the petitioner was directed to disclose the relationship between M/s. Seth Batra and Associates, Chartered Accountant, and the Directors in the Demerged Company. A supplementary affidavit has been filed in which it has been stated that Umesh Batra and Associates (the Directors) have no relationship with Seth Batra Associates, Chartered Accountants.

3. I have heard Sri Rohit Agrawal, learned Counsel for the petitioner and have perused the averments made in the petition as also the Scheme of Arrangement of the Demerged Company. In spite of the advertisements having been made in two newspapers nobody has come forward to file any objection. The objection in respect of ratio of exchange of shares has also been explained before the authorities (Official Liquidator). Thus, there being no objection and the Court being satisfied that the Scheme of arrangement of demerger is in the interest of the shareholders/creditors of the three companies, the Scheme of Arrangement of demerger, filed as Annexure No. 1 to the petition, stands approved. Let a formal order be issued within three weeks.

4. The petition stands disposed of. The petitioners shall also comply with all the statutory requirements within a month.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial