Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
OJCA/238/2010 3/ 3 JUDGMENT
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CIVIL
APPLICATION No. 238 of 2010
In
COMPANY
PETITION No. 119 of 2009
In
COMPANY APPLICATION No. 175 of 2009
For
Approval and Signature:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
=========================================
1
Whether
Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2
To
be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3
Whether
their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?
4
Whether
this case involves a substantial question of law as to the
interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order
made thereunder ?
5
Whether
it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?
=========================================
DHANESH
ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED - Applicant(s)
Versus
.
- Respondent(s)
=========================================
Appearance
:
MRS
SANGEETA N PAHWA for
Applicant(s) : 1,
MR PS CHAMPANERI for Respondent(s) :
1,
=========================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
Date
: 14/05/2010
ORAL
JUDGMENT
1. Present
application has been submitted by the applicant herein Dhanesh
Enterprise Private Limited Transferor Company for rectification
of the typographical mistakes in the Scheme of Amalgamation which has
been sanctioned by by this Court vide judgment and order dated
03.05.2010 in Company Petition No.117/2009
with Company Petition Nos.118/2009 and 119/2009.
2. Shri
Pahwa, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant
Transferee Company has submitted that there are some bonafide
typographical errors in the Scheme of Amalgamation which has been
sanctioned by this Court which are absolutely bonafide and therefore,
it is requested to rectify the said typographical mistakes. It is
submitted that in the Scheme in Clause 12.1 which relates to Clause V
of the Memorandum of Association of the Company (after sanction of
the Scheme), instead of Rs.60,00,000 (Rupees Sixty Lacs Only) it is
typed Rs.60,00,00,000 (Rupees Sixty Crores Only) . It is
further submitted that the second error is the description of figure
6,00,000 (six lacs) where it is described six seventy lacs
instead of six lacs . It is further submitted that in clause 13
of the Scheme, instead of reference being made to the Hon’ble High
Court of Gujarat, at Ahmedabad, through mistake, reference is made to
the High Court of Judicature, at Bombay. It is further submitted
that in Clause 19, the Transferee Company is described as the
resultant company . It is submitted that as per the Scheme, the
petitioner Company is described only as Transferee Company and not as
resultant Company. It is submitted that again the said mistake is a
typographical mistake, therefore, it is requested to permit the
applicant to make typographical corrections in the Scheme of
Amalgamation as per the averments contained in para 6 of the
application read with affidavit dated 29.07.2009 submitted by the
applicant in Company Petition No.119/2009. Shri P.S. Champaneri,
learned Assistant Solicitor General of India has appeared on behalf
of the Central Government.
3. Having
heard Shri P.S. Champaneri, learned Assistant Solicitor General
of India appearing on behalf of the Central Government and
considering the averments made in the application, prayer in terms of
para 9(B) is hereby granted and the applicant is permitted to correct
the typographical errors in the Scheme of Amalgamation as
mentioned/averred in para 4 of the application read with affidavit
dated 29.07.2009 submitted by the applicant in Company Petition
No.119/2009.
4. With
this, present Application is disposed of. Applicant shall pay a sum
of Rs.3,000/- to Shri P.S. Champaneri, learned Assistant Solicitor
General of India appearing on behalf of the Central Government
towards his professional fees which shall be paid by the applicant
directly within a period of 4 weeks from today.
(M.R.
Shah, J.)
*menon
Top