Skip to main content

Shareholder's Meetings

There are many events and activities in a company such as business proposals, appointments

of directors, removal of directors, alteration in Articles, etc. For such events, it is mandatory

to have general meetings which are commonly known as shareholder meetings.

There are three types of shareholder meetings-

1) Annual General Meetings

2) Extraordinary General Meetings

3) Court Convened Meeting

Annual General Meeting (AGM)-

Section 96 of the Companies Act, 2013 provides for the provision of the Annual General

Meeting. According to it, there is a compulsory requirement to hold Annual General Meeting

annually for every company, listed or unlisted. Though it is not compulsory for One Person

Company (OPC).

Why AGMs is necessary?

AGMs are necessary because every shareholder has a right to know about the financial

performance of the company and regarding future projects. Other than that, for a few

decisions there need the consent of the shareholders which are beyond the discretion of the

board of directors. It sets a good platform for the management and the shareholders to discuss

various issues such as past performance and policies of the company.

How to convene an AGM?

The Board of Directors has the authority to convene an AGM.

Notice to all the members, legal representatives of the deceased members, assignee of the

insolvent member, auditors of the company, and directors of the company must be given prior

to 21 days of AGM. AGM can be conducted with a shorter notice if 95% of the members

having the power to vote approve.

Extra-Ordinary General Meeting-

It is commonly known as EGM. An EGM is a meeting conducted between two Annual

General Meetings. Section 100 of the Indian Companies Act,2013 provides the provision for

Extra-Ordinary General Meeting. EGM is usually conducted when any important or urgent

issue arises and such urgency will not be in the interest of the next AGM.


Who has the power to convene an EGM?

The Board of Directors, Directors on request of members, requisitionists, or the Tribunal can

convene an EGM.

The Board of Directors can call an EGM whenever it deems fit bypassing board resolution in

the board meeting. Notice prior to 21 days must be given to all the members. The meeting

can be held at the shortest if 95% of members who are entitled to vote to agree.

If it is a deadlock in the management of the company then the Tribunal can call a meeting of

the company.

Court Convened Meeting-

Section 230 to 234 of the Companies Act deals with Court Convened Meeting (CCM). CCM

is held as per the directions of the Court. CCM is conducted in the matters of mergers,

acquisitions, amalgamations, winding up proposals. Any resolutions passed in the meeting

shall be approved by the majority in a number representing three-fourth in value held by the

shareholders present in person or by proxies at the time of the meeting.

What are the requisites of a valid meeting?

 The meeting shall be convened by proper authority.

 Proper notice shall be served upon the concerned members.

 A quorum shall be present.

 A chairman shall preside in the meeting.

 The Minutes shall be prepared of the proceedings and must be kept in record.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more