{"id":166987,"date":"2008-06-16T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-06-15T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/deccan-charters-limited-vs-nil-on-16-june-2008"},"modified":"2017-12-13T16:10:51","modified_gmt":"2017-12-13T10:40:51","slug":"deccan-charters-limited-vs-nil-on-16-june-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/deccan-charters-limited-vs-nil-on-16-june-2008","title":{"rendered":"Deccan Charters Limited vs Nil on 16 June, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Deccan Charters Limited vs Nil on 16 June, 2008<\/div>\n
Author: Mohan Shantanagoudar<\/div>\n
Pa?\" 1 \u00abLe :18' ewe\n\nV3716: ccc\ufb02 f, wrJaLp\u00abJ\n\nVioiz Com-a_ \n\nc\u00a3G\\.\u00a7~eJ- ,.2_;.:?~;';,;g,,.,,;,g_\n\" '\"\"x\" \u00e9\ufb02aumiwxu\n\nIN THE man coum OF KARNATAKA AT BAN{.%}tL\"C\u00a7\u00a3\u00a7E : f  io +4.,\u00bb Ste\n2 %sri.uday\";s\u00a7na, 1:-gamed senior oounst-,1 ibr\n\n '~  _ -   M--,l_s.I=~IQlla as  Advs.,)\n\n''  _' .   V __ .. RESPONDENT\n\n(1337  stmior counsel, Addl.Solicitor General\n\n AA  f0.r'SmLVecz1a Jadhav for ROG,\n\n--....----.----.---\n\nThis petition is \ufb01led under Sections 391 to 394 of the\n\n\" Companies Act, 1956, praying that for the reasons stated\n\ntherein this Hozfblc Court may be phased to sanctien the:\n\n\n\n.3-\n\namended compcsi\ufb02e Scheme of Arrangement,  by\nthe pctitioncr~o0mp-any so as to 'binding on thew ..\nshareholders of the pctitioncr--company.  . j  L' S . ' V.\n\nG0.P.H0.46[3008\n\nBETWEEN:\n\nKing\ufb01sher Airlines Limited V\n\nUB'I'owcr, Level 12  \n{.13 City, 24, Vittai mallya  , --- .   \nBangalore-1  PE*1*m.QNE.:R 3\n\n(By Sri. Uday Holla,  sc:9_rVA1ioa*Vr,\u00a7<3F\u00a2:I'15A3.\u00e9i~f(3r\nM\/s.Ho1La as Holla, A\u00a21"\u00a7i.',} '      " v\n\nANI):\n\nNil     -    __RESPONDEN'I'\n\n(By Sri  AddI.Solicit:or General\n1'01: 'Smt.'Vecix;a for RGO,\n\nTxsgis-.p'cw;i:;ia:: i\u00e9'  Sections 391 to 394 of the\nCompanies }'.y:t',' 1956,'-._pmymg that for the reasons stated\nthe:;'efm' this Hdunfblc Court may be pleased to sanction the\n\n V.  am\u00a73t:i:ieg1_LV<:t:gmpositc.....g;\u00a2h,cmc of Arrangement, pmpmd by\n"  'the jie\ufb01t\u00e9ongrzepompany so as to bind the petitioner-company\n \u00a3:31(i'tt;ei1ff regptgts\ufb01ve shamholders and creditors.\n\n\n\n  \n\n Aviation Limited\n\n  35\/'2; Cun1.lingham Road\n  Ba;t1g&Iorc~52 .. PETITIONER\n\n\n\nAND:\n\nM\/s.HoI1a as Holla, Aclvs.,)\nAN D: . V V.\nNil  \n\n(By Sri M<\/a>\ufb02avindran.    General\nfor Smt\ufb02vecna Jadhavfor R00, 2 *' V \" \n\nSri M.R.Ravin;1ranat\u00a3i\u00a50bja\u00e9:g:tQr;\u00ab.;*ap. Raman, Aciv.,)\n\nThis pi:\ufb01tie.;3\ufb01,is  'u:;de;aso\u00a2:ig'ns 391 to 394 of the\n \"$9.735,  for the reasons stateci\ntherein jthis E'-:.x1j':'bie  be pleased to sanction the\namende\u00e9' _\u00bbS\u00a2:heme'v'--oI' Arrangement, proposed by\nthe petiti<3nc::.~con1pe:i\u00a7\u00a33t' Sc; as  binding on the petitioner\u00bb\ncompany and  shamhalders and creditors.\n\n these jmt\ufb01f\ufb01znsvncoming on for ord\ufb01rs, this day thc:\n\n -  the: fan\u00a2w\u00ab\u00a7mg':-\n\nORDER\n<\/pre>\n
A””‘Th\u00a2E;”se-\u00e9i\u00e9titions are \ufb01led under Sections 391 ta<\/p>\n
H  pf  Companies Act, 1956, (for short herelxlaftc’ r<\/p>\n
 to as the ‘Act;’}, for obtaining the sanction of the<\/p>\n
VT   to the Composite Scheme of Arrangement<\/p>\n
V’<\/p>\n
..4,.\n<\/p>\n
(hereinafter called as the “scheme”) between <\/p>\n
Airlines Limited (King\ufb01sher), Deccan    _<\/p>\n
(DCL), and Deccan Aviation Limited (Deocaza-,’~. jg,    %<\/p>\n
2. DCL, the  ‘ ‘ ‘~ ‘ 1:  AA<\/p>\n
Co.P.No.45\/2008 was i11corpV:;1*:zg,tcd ‘ux3′{  <\/p>\n
the Registrar of Comp_:_-miss,
\nAviation Training Limia\u00e9a-   % or Kingfisher<\/p>\n
Aviation    to Deccan<\/p>\n
  honsequent to change
\nof nam\u00e9V'”wai*s.  which was issued by<\/p>\n
the Rc_g_51str a ;’r-V of  Kaxnataka, Bangalore. An<\/p>\n
 V’ ‘*1.1p~i:;<$:'{l\u00a3;t*:c sappy V Of"""i'.":'1V<:': Memorandum and Articles of<\/p>\n
 is produced at Annexum-A to the<\/p>\n
 V. Til\ufb01egistercd O\ufb01ice of D01. is situated at<\/p>\n
 'I'ea;%\u00a3er, Level 12, UB City, No.24, Vittal Mallya<\/p>\n
M'<\/p>\n
– 5.\n<\/p>\n
3. The authorized share capital of D01. is<\/p>\n
Rs.100,000,000\/~ comprising of 10,000,000 oijazity<\/p>\n
shares of Rs.10\/– each. The issuod and  <\/p>\n
capital of the oompany is Rs. 100,000,000;  <\/p>\n
of 10,000,000 equity shares of I\ufb01is.  <\/p>\n
up and paid capital is ~ <\/p>\n
5,000,001 equity sharos of 5  up
\nand Rs.3,999,999.20  equity
\nshares of Rs. 10\/ –   paid up,<\/p>\n
tomimg, of 000.34 ,<\/p>\n
  DCL is to own, manage, run<\/p>\n
 v  _ch;.m0r_j  handle and operate all types<\/p>\n
   in air transport for the carriage of<\/p>\n
 mails and other items on all routes<\/p>\n
  ‘-and B1100 on national and international level subject to<\/p>\n
H in force and to act as commission agents,<\/p>\n
‘ V’  agents, idonting agents, travel agents, \ufb02eet<\/p>\n
V’ owners, garage owners, service station owners, cargo<\/p>\n
V<\/p>\n
-5-<\/span><\/p>\n
superintendents, cargo owners, leading and <\/p>\n
contractors, eouriers, liaisioners, charterers, A’<\/p>\n
tour operators, etc.<\/p>\n
5. The Board of Directors of.\ufb02:1e-DCL:  ‘A 2<\/p>\n
and adopted the Scheme of  \u00e9it”  <\/p>\n
held on 31.1.2008, by  vel:1ieh,–“a’ rt  er ‘V ‘<\/p>\n
Service Operations Un\u20ac3,ertak:zA.’n””gA. ‘Deecafi ‘is <\/p>\n
to be transferred to    Scheme cf
\nArrangfs\ufb01ierit  the Charter Services<\/p>\n
Operatiene   into the peti\ufb01oner-<\/p>\n
company uiidet the pi\ufb01osiieions of Sections 391 to 394 of<\/p>\n
 ” “the “Af:’t. itjs a\ufb01pmved by this Court, it will take effect<\/p>\n
 Appointed Date, i.e., 15* January,<\/p>\n
  to the petitiimer-company, the Scheme<\/p>\n
  of  is in the interest of the company and its<\/p>\n
VA  je;@ha1’e};’1o1ders and creditors.<\/p>\n
V’<\/p>\n
. 7 ..\n<\/p>\n
This Court dispensed with tha convening of<\/p>\n
meeting of equity shareholders, secured and <\/p>\n
creditors in CA.No.210\/2008. Thereafter, <\/p>\n
the Co.P.No.45\/2008 is \ufb01led by the DCL…._!\u00a7I\u00a7$ic\u00a7\u00e9.::\u00a7f_ mg \u00ab <\/p>\n
petition was published in   4′ <\/p>\n
Ka1nataka”on 16.5.2008.  .\n<\/p>\n
6. King\ufb01shc-.rV,   th1:. “”‘  in<\/p>\n
Co.P.No.46\/2008 was%i:1corpai~gLtea\u00a7;unA25.7.2oo4 with
\nthe R<7giSh'af::of   A    taka. Its Registered<\/p>\n
Of\ufb01oe  Level 12, UB City, No.24,<\/p>\n
Vittal   A}3.%af1g:alore~1. An up-to date copy of<\/p>\n
 V'  .Me\u00a3ii'bra\u00a71dum of Assidcia\ufb01on and Artriclcs of Assoc1a.' tion<\/p>\n
  Vpwd'   Anncxureg -A, to the petition.<\/p>\n
  authorized sh are capital of Kingfisher is<\/p>\n
"  .f\u00bb.:Rs';}1..1,$G0,000,000\/— comprising of 425,000,000 equity<\/p>\n
    of Rs. 101- each amounting to Rs.4,250,000,(}OO<\/p>\n
"  72,500,000 6% redeemable preference shares of<\/p>\n
V5<\/p>\n
.3.\n<\/p>\n
Rs.1()0\/~ each amountixlg to Rs.7,25{),000,00(}\/\u00ab. The<\/p>\n
issued, subscribed and paid up capital of the <\/p>\n
is Rs.4,0{)4,1}. 1,500\/ – comprising of 303,4 I <\/p>\n
shares of Rs.10\/- each fully paid up,”<\/p>\n
Rs.3,034,11 1,500\/~ and 9,7ceoi,boo \u00abL we  <\/p>\n
preference shares of Re,,1Q0\/-A”-eiaeh, <\/p>\n
Rs.970,000,0{)O\/~.\n<\/p>\n
8. The main  set out in the<\/p>\n
  czlia is to establish,
\nmainf33’An”  ”   transport operations,
\ninc1uc1in\u00a7e,a?i:~  air lines and lines of aerial<\/p>\n
 ‘  _ ee=ij(i:e_’g{;afneee (iI’3e–1–udi11g scheduled passenger air<\/p>\n
    and lines, and chartered domestic<\/p>\n
ii  eerviees and lines) for carriage of<\/p>\n
  baggage, mails, fmight, cargo and<\/p>\n
iieiagegfganandise of all and every kind and description<\/p>\n
. K  jz\u00e9rhetlner as principals, agents or otherwise and to set up<\/p>\n
V’\/><\/p>\n
.. 9.\n<\/p>\n
flying servims both as private and public carriers (:11<\/p>\n
national and inttz-.rnationa1 routes, etc.<\/p>\n
9. 011 31.1.2003, the I~3oard of <\/p>\n
 Kin\ufb01sher approved the Scheme. Th\ufb01 .  <\/p>\n
Scheme of Arrangement pro;’):;’)seE{4′ <\/p>\n
Commercial Airline Divisign Untiartakjiig. % bf  the  .<\/p>\n
Petitioner-company into  911 ‘$2 \u00e9:g:oi:r1g:’f.conoem
\nbasis. The demerger  Airline Division<\/p>\n
  ” intc: Deccan on a
\ngoing   under the provisions of
\nSections    Act.\n<\/p>\n
V’    ABYZ   order dated 20.3.2008, in<\/p>\n
   this Court has ordared convening the<\/p>\n
 .   shareholders, smured and tmsecurtxl<\/p>\n
 cmditofs. The advextisement of notice mnvening the<\/p>\n
V’:-V was published on 27 .3. 2008 in “Asian Age”<\/p>\n
.    “Vijaya Karnataka” newspapers, \ufb01xing the date of<\/p>\n
F”\n<\/p>\n
-19-<\/span><\/p>\n
meeting as 17.4.2008. Accordingly, en  fhe<\/p>\n
meeting of preference  ‘ :.A_1:~   ,,,, <\/p>\n
sharehelders, eeeured and  <\/p>\n
held. One preference shaxjeigolder’ lee-1ding” ,<\/p>\n
redeemable nex1–cumulat1″\u00a7?ew.:._V”V’p1;fefei”er\u00a7eev’:  of
\nRe. 100\/ – each fully’  Ht1″1Je scheme.
\nEleven equity eharehelders  equity
\nshares of    voted in favour
\nand  The meeting of the
\n __ theweempany approved the
\nscheme    Six secured creditors, to<\/p>\n
wieem Rs.’3x,94() ,’$\u00a728v,:949\/~ was due, voted in favour and<\/p>\n
‘V  eerie \u00abagainst the scheme. The meeting ef the<\/p>\n
  of the company approved the scheme<\/p>\n
bfreqixieife majority. Twenty unsecured creditors to<\/p>\n
V”   whemks.1710,00,25,692.29 was due, voted in favour<\/p>\n
none veted awinst the scheme. The meeting of the<\/p>\n
   creditors approved the scheme by requisite<\/p>\n
In\/*<\/p>\n
.1}.\n<\/p>\n
majority. Thereafter C0.P.No.46\/2008 is rgai.<\/p>\n
King\ufb01sher on 25.4.2008. Notice of %..’v.–.;;s? ” <\/p>\n
published in “Asian Age”   “I <\/p>\n
newspapers on 16.5.2008.  <\/p>\n<\/p>\n
11. I)eocan.v   in
\nCo.P.Na.47\/2003  1995 in the
\nname of    with the
\nRegistrar   The name of the
\n   Aviation Limited and<\/p>\n
of 1769316  i Ssa,1\u20acd A’aIV1 u14.3.20O5 by the Rcgisuar cf<\/p>\n
  “””  The Regstemd O\ufb01ioe is<\/p>\n
   Cunningl1am Road, Ba.ngaloIe-2. The<\/p>\n
 of Association and Articles of Association<\/p>\n
  isjprddtfced at Anncxure-A, tn the petition.<\/p>\n
A’    The main objects of Deccan under which it is<\/p>\n
  -Vv-vgalidly entitled to and carries on the business of charter<\/p>\n
.13.\n<\/p>\n
and schedulad airlines business are set  the<\/p>\n
Memorandum sf Association.\n<\/p>\n
12. The authorized shai\u00e9  7. AV<\/p>\n
Rs.5,000,00(),0OO\/ — comprising ._o f .  <\/p>\n
shares cf R-s.10\/- each,  ta
\nand l,O0,00,000 piuigmti\u00e9\u00e9 of; ~ each
\namcun\ufb01ng Rs.   subscribed
\nand paid  \u00abas on 31.5.2008 is
\nRs.   of 1,358,682.13 equity
\n   up.\n<\/p>\n
 T116″  Directors of the company
\n this” in its meeting held on 31.1.2008,<\/p>\n
   __which, the Charter Services Opcrati\ufb01ns<\/p>\n
  the petitioncpconapany is proposed to be<\/p>\n
 .’  to DCL and the Scheduled Airline Divisian<\/p>\n
V    of King\ufb01shar is proposed to be demerged<\/p>\n
 transferred into the petitiox1e:r-company on a going<\/p>\n
f\\\/5<\/p>\n
.13.\n<\/p>\n
concem basis and the goodwill, if any, arising after<\/p>\n
giving effect to tha aocountillg treatment as  in<\/p>\n
para- 13 of the Scheme shall be set o\ufb01_’_.–  th\u00e9’:<\/p>\n
\n\nsecurities premium amount     \n\n2008. The reduction of     as\n\nmentioned above in this    $1.3  L'\n\n<\/pre>\n
integral pan of this ‘got   separate
\nprocess in term$ of  to 103 of the<\/p>\n
Act as the saiv 41 c__    Visitinl\ufb01r chm’ inishing of<\/p>\n
liabili\ufb01iegs   share capital or any paid
\nup    ii-‘atack Exchange and National<\/p>\n
Stqig\u00e9k   conveyed their No Objection to the<\/p>\n
  this Composite Scheme: of arrangement in<\/p>\n
  ag\ufb01ent. No objections received<\/p>\n
  said Stock Exchanges am produced at:<\/p>\n
  A’A11:;e\u00a7ii1rc-H to the petition.<\/p>\n
14. It is pI'(}12}()S\u20acd to ccmsolidatc the two<\/p>\n
u”S<:hedu1cd Airline business of Kin\ufb01sher and the<\/p>\n
{A\/'<\/p>\n
. 34,.\n<\/p>\n
petitioner—company in a single entity to create a more
\ncompetitive business, both in scale and  of<\/p>\n
operations. The proposed consolidation  <\/p>\n
optimizing cost, revenue and capital   <\/p>\n
to overall shareholder value   i 7. ii<\/p>\n
operational synergies. Henoe, tl1e_1’Compos.iteV”So1V1eiile’of L’<\/p>\n
Arrangement is proposecl” d_eme1’~*ge’ {he
\nAirline Division   lg :\u00abgf\ufb01’I<..':n@sl1ei* into the
\npetitioner-eorlipany  -a  basis. The<\/p>\n
den:;.erge.AriAirline Division Undertaking
\nof lungz\ufb01" Q'  :_&xe\u00a7Vi";ietitioner-company on a going<\/p>\n
  ' is "proposed under the provisions of<\/p>\n
  to 394 of the Act. The said Scheme will<\/p>\n
 ._  the demerger appointed date, i.e., lst 03"<\/p>\n
Kpril; : 2053.\n<\/p>\n
V is  l”15. The Composite Scheme of Arrangement also<\/p>\n
 ‘efoposes to transfer the Charter Services Operations<\/p>\n
H Undertaking of the petitioner-company into DCL under<\/p>\n
r’\/’<\/p>\n
– 15 ..\n<\/p>\n
the provisions of Section 391 to 394 of the Act end the<\/p>\n
same, if approved and sa.I1etioned_ by this <\/p>\n
take e\ufb01eet from the Slump Sale AppoiI1te;i:1a;<\/p>\n
of January, 2008. The Charter ” ef _ <\/p>\n
the petit3’ener–eempa11y, which  2<\/p>\n
approximately 2% of the tetal <\/p>\n
company is being  eff e;”eepar\u00e9imen’iE.ity.<\/p>\n
16. As per   ef Arrangement,<\/p>\n
pu1:’rsue1’1t.:’:iv:fgo  ef the Charter Services
\nOpeiaffiens   of the petitioner-company into<\/p>\n
DCL, a\u00e9guxgd of shall be paid by DCL to the<\/p>\n
‘ V’  . “p\u00e9;ti’i;i-ener-company as eonsideratien. Further, as per<\/p>\n
  Scheme of Arrangement, pursuant to the<\/p>\n
‘A  ef the Scheduled Airline Division Undertaking<\/p>\n
 AA of ‘\ufb01iiig\ufb01eher into the petitioner-company on a going<\/p>\n
V’ *  basis, the petitioner–eempany shall allot equity<\/p>\n
 shares of the face value ofrs.10\/- each credited as fully<\/p>\n
paid up in the capital of the petitioner-company, to the<\/p>\n
F\/\\<\/p>\n
.. g5 ..\n<\/p>\n
shareholders 01′ Kirlg\ufb01sher, whose names appear in the
\nRegister of Members en the Record Date in the <\/p>\n
ratio: “3 equity shares of Rs.10\/- each in  <\/p>\n
company shall be issued and     <\/p>\n
paid up equity shares of V<\/p>\n
King\ufb01sher” and as xegansjs-37:33 \ufb01iefeieaneei
\nKing\ufb01sher, fo\ufb02ewieg K i be issued
\nand allotted by   to the preference
\nshareholder’ ef H  V   ” \ufb01emerger Record<\/p>\n
Date: __”  up 6% redeemable non-
\n ‘   share of 123.100\/~ in the<\/p>\n
pefitienez;-ee$:1f\u00a7enf\u00a7’eha11 be allotted for every 1 (one) 6%<\/p>\n
 f  nemetnnuletive preference share of<\/p>\n
 . %%’e:2s;1ee{1;+  held in King\ufb01sher.”<\/p>\n
 Z This Court by the order dated 20.3.2003 in<\/p>\n
   ‘TCA.bvfe.208\/2008 ordered convening the meeting of<\/p>\n
  shareholders, secured and unsecured creditors.<\/p>\n
‘ Accordingly, the advertisement of convening the meeting<\/p>\n
W<\/p>\n
– 17 .\n<\/p>\n
was published on 27.3.2008 in “Asian Age” and “Vijaya<\/p>\n
Karnataka” \ufb01xing the date of meerfmg as 17.433008.<\/p>\n
Accordmgly, on that day, the meeting was<\/p>\n
the Chajrmanstlip of Dr.V1jay Maliya.<\/p>\n
13. Ninetyeight   ‘ <\/p>\n
9,2 153,755 equity shares.uf__Rs. in each.  x %<\/p>\n
voted in favour of the ‘V arid.  ‘V’Sh$’1;rehoiders
\nrepresenting 58  itii”  fully paid<\/p>\n
UP: ‘?\u20acit\u00e9d~- g\ufb01gam}, ‘  6 votes were invalid.
\nThe  silareholders of the company<\/p>\n
apprgfnved .  by requisite majority. Eight<\/p>\n
 V’  ._   Whom Rs.788,33,72,807\/– was due,<\/p>\n
   and none voted against the scheme. The<\/p>\n
    the secured creditcrs of the company<\/p>\n
 AAapp1’oxf\u00e9:d the scheme by requisite majority. 18<\/p>\n
 creditors to whom Rs.26,75,280,389\/- was<\/p>\n
  V. _ \ufb02ue, voted in favour and name voted against the scheme.<\/p>\n
The mee\ufb01ng of the unsacured creditors approved the<\/p>\n
M<\/p>\n
. \u00a38.\n<\/p>\n
scheme by requisite majority. Thema\ufb01er,<\/p>\n
Co.P.No.4′?\/200313 \ufb01led by Deccan on 25.4.2OQ’\u00e9g ‘.The<\/p>\n
notice of the petition was published in “As_iai1’ _<\/p>\n
“Vijaya Kaxnataksa” an 16.5.2008, as  V. <\/p>\n
Court.\n<\/p>\n
19. The Regional  = %’<\/p>\n
Affairs, Southern R\u20ac:giOI1′,.’ ‘=.\u00a2\u00bbh<:n1]a ]';_   his
\nobjactions in the      ugh Sri<\/p>\n
v.c.:)avey,}1;e of'<:omp; mas. Bangalore, in an<\/p>\n
thesetxn-cc;  in the aftidavit, 5 to 7<\/p>\n
Gbj\ufb01\ufb01\ufb01\ufb02l\ufb01\ufb01"Wfi3rEVfai\u00a7':d;"'\u00a3h\u20ac Assistant Solicitor General of<\/p>\n
   appeaI;iIig"""OI1 behalf of the Registrar of<\/p>\n
   to only three objections, submitted<\/p>\n
fl\ufb01t  valuation of 125.69 crores, for the sale of<\/p>\n
 ACha1'taf'Services Opera\ufb01ons Undertaking of "Dccwn" to<\/p>\n
  as found in Clause 5 of the Scheme, are not gven.<\/p>\n
   further submitted that the change of name of the<\/p>\n
companies causes confusion to the public and therefore<\/p>\n
V2<\/p>\n
– 19 –\n<\/p>\n
tha procedure as contemplated under Sections 21 and<\/p>\n
23 of the Companies Act has to be followed. He fiiither<\/p>\n
submitted that the United Breweries (Hoidi:igS}<\/p>\n
has; violated tha provisions of Section    <\/p>\n
in not taking permission by the  <\/p>\n
while acquiring the shares;\n<\/p>\n
20. One of the “V”<\u00a7l'iarehdId:6fs  H namei<\/p>\n
M.R.Ravincira.na.th,    filed an<\/p>\n
appiicatic\ufb02 ";:\u00a7:i'1:i1i3i\u00a7i<;1*i' "Ito have his say in the<\/p>\n
matte:i*_Aas4'_ he   the two shareholders wha<\/p>\n
0i3fj)t)S\u20acdV'\ufb01'.1{i%  "~.–""i'hc said application is opposed<\/p>\n
 *  _ b3\/i_: mtiti<iiiei*s–.–\u00ab " However, Sri Ravindranath was<\/p>\n
   "have his say in the matter. He is<\/p>\n
  Sri B.V.RamaI1, learned advocate. It is<\/p>\n
 submiifitd by Sri B.V.Raman that the demcrger may<\/p>\n
  the interest of workmen, inasmuch as there will<\/p>\n
. K    desparity of Wages among the workzazien bekmging to<\/p>\n
King\ufb01sher and Deccan. He further submits that in<\/p>\n
if\/\\<\/p>\n
.29.\n<\/p>\n
order to avoid the stamp duty, ma <\/p>\n
compaznies have planned for the   <\/p>\n
demcrgcr.\n<\/p>\n
2 1. Clause-5 of the S\ufb01ilgme  ”\n<\/p>\n
of Rs.69 crorcs for  sa1e ref to
\nDCL. The  by DCL
\nWithin 30  froziaiu  “I’7’_\u00a2\ufb02’ect:’tve: Date or
\nsuch dai\u00e9     by the Board sf
\n  regard it is contended
\nby    General that the detailed
\n  4′ AI:’e\u00a7w:-“~”Lthe sale consideration of Rs.69<\/p>\n
 is  “at, is not forthcoming. The said<\/p>\n
V   be accepted, inasmuch as M] s.C’xrant<\/p>\n
.’  Lilone of the lcadm g Accountants, who have<\/p>\n
  the charter scrviccs operations\/business carfxzd<\/p>\n
 2  by Deccan at Rs.69.I0 Crores. ‘While doing so, the<\/p>\n
 Chartered Accountants have taken intc consideration<\/p>\n
various relevant factors. T 6’ report contains every<\/p>\n
.23..\n<\/p>\n
detaii and is self explanatory. The value of the hr.-:s>iness<\/p>\n
is not an exact. science and ultimately <\/p>\n
what it is worth to a serious investor or  <\/p>\n
be Prepared to Pay a substi\u00e9ntial The \u00bb7 <\/p>\n
valuation of charter business of  <\/p>\n
is carried out by M\/=Tho.;V.’nEo_i_”1
\n\ufb02ow method, not aeset   oompmable
\ncompany market ‘Based on such
\nvaluation.  of the charter
\n33.5931 million, i.e., R859. 10
\n   of M\/s.Grant Thornton is<\/p>\n
   Court. The same was also made<\/p>\n
   shareholders, creditors for their perusal.<\/p>\n
   report. was also sent to the Of\ufb01ee of<\/p>\n
  Government. They have not raised any<\/p>\n
 * objecfion for the report till \ufb01ling of these petitions. Only<\/p>\n
 1% months after film’ g the petitions, the said’<\/p>\n
u ” objection is raised by the (‘entral Government. As<\/p>\n
W’<\/p>\n
.22.\n<\/p>\n
aforementianed, the said objection cannot be sustained
\nin View of the fact M\/s.Grant Thornton, have’  into<\/p>\n
consideration various factors and  as<\/p>\n
business. More over the va1ua_t;i9I_1 is  <\/p>\n
all the shareholders and  creditdcs  <\/p>\n
I This Court cannot sit  ~  <\/p>\n
wisdom of the shareho1d\u00a2r\u00ab.,{;ne  Sections
\n391 and 394 of    the nature of<\/p>\n
information ma   “furnished to the<\/p>\n
mei\ufb01bgr\ufb01  r\ufb01\ufb01iiitprs’ befcre taking a decision with
\n . to   of scheme of<\/p>\n
<\u00a71\u00a7:tzit:;:ge1*.;\/aa:ai;\u00a71'\u00a7g;a.Iijation. It is not in dispute that such<\/p>\n
'V   and decumcnts are furnished. When once<\/p>\n
 ._   is taken with requisite majority for<\/p>\n
ciemefger; it is not open for one or two members of the<\/p>\n
 "  to abuse of the process of the Court. Thus,<\/p>\n
  said contention fails.\n<\/p>\n
V<\/p>\n
.23.\n<\/p>\n
22. With regard to change of name as<\/p>\n
aforementioned, the learned Assistant ‘So1ici’i:\u00a7r:.{52-seiaeral<\/p>\n
submitted that the change of the name  <\/p>\n
would cause confusion to the  Vi” j x<\/p>\n
approval of the Central bee’   ‘<\/p>\n
change of name as per’ Se\ufb01tion “R2 1 . 0&7,   There
\ncannot be any dispuize    hesie to take
\nnecessary permissieii.’     .AA(\u00a7e1:fra1 Government<\/p>\n
under     01′ name. This<\/p>\n
 I similar situation, has ruled<\/p>\n
that   as it relates to change of name<\/p>\n
 beco11ie..Ve; )ere3:.t:ive only after obtaining permission<\/p>\n
 f  Central Government as required under Section<\/p>\n
 2  \u00a2:r7\u00a3m~_.  In View of the same, in this matter also, it<\/p>\n
  made clear that the change of name will only<\/p>\n
  ” ‘   obtaining approval of the Central Government<\/p>\n
  required under Section. 2 1 of the Act.<\/p>\n
V’<\/p>\n
. 34 .\n<\/p>\n
23. The further submissien of the learned
\nAssistant Solicitor General is that the UriitedV.i3ife’s\u00a77e1ies<\/p>\n
(Heldings) Limited, has violated Section 1(}:8’+i’&;it:j_tiid<\/p>\n
net take permission (If the   <\/p>\n
acquiring shares. Thougli it   3  1:  :;_ fhe ‘ <\/p>\n
petitioners that  ef
\napplicable to the facts of    course of
\narguments, Sri (Jdaya  senior counsel<\/p>\n
appearing on ‘of submitted that<\/p>\n
already.  ie\ufb02ieetged by the Central Government
\nagaJI1’ ‘awaited  (Holdings) fer initiatmg’ action<\/p>\n
egriiier   of the Act. It is also brought to the<\/p>\n
   the Court that the said United Breweries<\/p>\n
 .  already replied to the said” notice. 1:” it is<\/p>\n
  objection does not hold good any more, as<\/p>\n
 ” =  proceedings will take place under Section 108\u00ab–A<\/p>\n
 * 4 ii ‘of; the Act.\n<\/p>\n
V<\/p>\n
.Q5..\n<\/p>\n
24. Except the aforementioned <\/p>\n
no ether objections were raised by H  <\/p>\n
Solicitor General. Though   <\/p>\n
raised by the Registrar or  u;e’es:\ufb01:atem\u00a2:m sf\u00bb %<\/p>\n
objections, as the said objections are .x}{GiV’:p1;\u00e9\u00a7ssed into
\nduring the course   ‘\ufb01elds that<\/p>\n
those objections are not? Siifrseqiien\ufb02y.<\/p>\n
25.   is ‘contended by one of
\nthe O’bj’\u00e9Lt1.5ife  that aspect of payment
\nof    is net mentioned in the<\/p>\n
scheme. -~   also cannot be sustained,<\/p>\n
 ”  .,  stamx\ufb02 “p~<:iuty is payable only after sanctior\ufb01ng<\/p>\n
    It is net necessary to specify the stamp<\/p>\n
  scheme. Immediately aiter sanctioning of<\/p>\n
 Athe sefieme, the valuation report will be prepared and<\/p>\n
  the petjtieners are liable to my the stamp<\/p>\n
  iduiy as per law.\n<\/p>\n
V<\/p>\n
. 25 –\n<\/p>\n
26. The another objection raised by Sri<\/p>\n
Ravindranath is that the interest of the workmen <\/p>\n
be safeguarded. Aceording to him,   <\/p>\n
desparity of wages if a portion of  \ufb01se “= <\/p>\n
company is merged with <\/p>\n
statement, it is made elear”by–.j;he  over:  *<\/p>\n
after demerger, the workmcn__i\u00a7ifilI__dxa.w .\ufb02*1eT.  salary
\nas they were drawing’   ‘\u00bb tier; If it
\nis so, there wmbc  wgrlnnen at all.<\/p>\n
More ‘over, 1 has approached this
\nCourt by <\/p>\n
3 ‘2?’~..  Via the petitioners, the proposed<\/p>\n
V.   Scheme will be bene\ufb01cial for the<\/p>\n
   {.\u00a7_’v’v\u00bbpetitioners, and creditors and W11’ 1 result in<\/p>\n
-V mofe  business. The proposed amended<\/p>\n
K V’ V’  Scheme of Arrangement will be bene\ufb01cial<\/p>\n
‘    the overall interest of the companies in question<\/p>\n
”  their respeo \u00b0ve Members and Creditors and will<\/p>\n
in\/3<\/p>\n
~27.\n<\/p>\n
facilitate scaling up of operations, full time <\/p>\n
attention, appropriate funding as wo11__ :”agV T  b <\/p>\n
development on a standalonoii   <\/p>\n
enhance shareholder valuo, toe  of V  o<\/p>\n
amended Composite Schomo  said
\nsubmission made by \u00absuppoftod by the
\nsharohoiders,  by not
\nraising any    In this
\nView of    to sanction the
\namendod   ‘ Arrangement proposed
\nby the  Accordingly, the following<\/p>\n
order; is m.ado:’\u00a2 ..  V’ V’<\/p>\n
V   ”  Composite Scheme of Arrangomont<\/p>\n
 .  {he petitioners-companies is sanctioned.<\/p>\n
  will be binding on equity shareholders,<\/p>\n
   creditors and unsecured creditors of the<\/p>\n
‘  – –. ” po3;itionors-conxparzics.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Deccan Charters Limited vs Nil on 16 June, 2008 Author: Mohan Shantanagoudar Pa?” 1 \u00abLe :18′ ewe V3716: ccc\ufb02 f, wrJaLp\u00abJ Vioiz Com-a_ c\u00a3G\\.\u00a7~eJ- ,.2_;.:?~;’;,;g,,.,,;,g_ ” ‘””x” \u00e9\ufb02aumiwxu IN THE man coum OF KARNATAKA AT BAN{.%}tL”C\u00a7\u00a3\u00a7E : f io +4.,\u00bb Ste 2 %sri.uday”;s\u00a7na, 1:-gamed senior oounst-,1 ibr ‘~ _ – M–,l_s.I=~IQlla as […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-166987","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nDeccan Charters Limited vs Nil on 16 June, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/deccan-charters-limited-vs-nil-on-16-june-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Deccan Charters Limited vs Nil on 16 June, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/deccan-charters-limited-vs-nil-on-16-june-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2008-06-15T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-12-13T10:40:51+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"17 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/deccan-charters-limited-vs-nil-on-16-june-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/deccan-charters-limited-vs-nil-on-16-june-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Deccan Charters Limited vs Nil on 16 June, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-06-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-12-13T10:40:51+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/deccan-charters-limited-vs-nil-on-16-june-2008\"},\"wordCount\":2942,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/deccan-charters-limited-vs-nil-on-16-june-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/deccan-charters-limited-vs-nil-on-16-june-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/deccan-charters-limited-vs-nil-on-16-june-2008\",\"name\":\"Deccan Charters Limited vs Nil on 16 June, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-06-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-12-13T10:40:51+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/deccan-charters-limited-vs-nil-on-16-june-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/deccan-charters-limited-vs-nil-on-16-june-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/deccan-charters-limited-vs-nil-on-16-june-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Deccan Charters Limited vs Nil on 16 June, 2008\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Deccan Charters Limited vs Nil on 16 June, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/deccan-charters-limited-vs-nil-on-16-june-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Deccan Charters Limited vs Nil on 16 June, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/deccan-charters-limited-vs-nil-on-16-june-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-06-15T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-12-13T10:40:51+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"17 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/deccan-charters-limited-vs-nil-on-16-june-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/deccan-charters-limited-vs-nil-on-16-june-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Deccan Charters Limited vs Nil on 16 June, 2008","datePublished":"2008-06-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-12-13T10:40:51+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/deccan-charters-limited-vs-nil-on-16-june-2008"},"wordCount":2942,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/deccan-charters-limited-vs-nil-on-16-june-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/deccan-charters-limited-vs-nil-on-16-june-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/deccan-charters-limited-vs-nil-on-16-june-2008","name":"Deccan Charters Limited vs Nil on 16 June, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-06-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-12-13T10:40:51+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/deccan-charters-limited-vs-nil-on-16-june-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/deccan-charters-limited-vs-nil-on-16-june-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/deccan-charters-limited-vs-nil-on-16-june-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Deccan Charters Limited vs Nil on 16 June, 2008"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/166987","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=166987"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/166987\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=166987"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=166987"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=166987"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}