Law:

Section:

(a) Companies Ordinance (XLVII of 1984)--- ----S. 284---Scheme of arrangement---High Court, jurisdiction of---Scope---Before sanctioning such scheme even though approved by majority of concerned creditors or members, the Court has to be satisfied that the company or any other person moving such application for sanction has disclosed all relevant matters mentioned in proviso to S. 284(2) of Companies Ordinance, 1984. (b) Companies Ordinance (XLVII of 1984)--- ----S. 284---Scheme of arrangement---Clarification introduced in scheme---Scope---Scheme of arrangement was approved by Company Judge by adding clarification to the scheme---Appellants were aggrieved of such clarification introduced by the Court to scheme of arrangements---Validity---Question of viability of scheme was to be judged subject to the condition that scheme sanctioned by majority was also to remain binding on dissenting minority of creditors or members, even though they did not consent to such scheme and to such extent absence of their consent had no effect on the scheme---Even in case of such a scheme of compromise and arrangement put up for sanction before Company Judge, it was to be seen whether proposed scheme was lawful, just and fair to the whole class of creditors or members, including dissenting minority to whom it was offered for approval and which had been approved by such class of persons with requisite majority vote---Company Judge while dealing with issue of such nature was not to act as a court of appeal and sit in over the informed view of concerned parties to the compromise as the same would be in the realm of corporate and commercial wisdom of concerned parties--- Court was not required to unnecessarily disapprove considered opinion and commercial wisdom of majority shareholders or creditors of company unless it was in violation of law and public policy---Jurisdiction of Company Judge in such matters was peripheral and supervisory and not appellate---Division Bench of High Court struck down the clarification as the same was violative of the scheme and scope of S. 284(2) of Companies Ordinance, 1984---Intra-court appeal was allowed in circumstances. (c) Companies Ordinance (XLVII…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492