Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
S. Company Partnership
No.
1.
A partnership is governed by A company gets governed by the
2.
A partnership is sum total of A company represents a group of
Contd.
…..Differences Between Company and Partnership
3. It is not a distinct legal entity. It enjoys a separate legal
members.
case of partnership.
Contd.
…..Differences Between Company and Partnership
members.
Contd.
……Differences Between Company and Partnership
8. In case of partnership the number A public company may have as many
in case of banking business and company cannot have more than fifty
company.
10. In case of a partnership, cent per cent In case of a company, decision of the
Under the proviso to Section 31 (1) and (2A) to the Companies Act , all public
companies, whether originally incorporated as a public limited company or at
any time converted into a public limited company (under section 44 of the
Act), may be converted into a private limited company, if the members so
desire. The reasons for such conversion must, however, be just, convincing, and
sufficient. The company must not be listed on any recognised stock exchange.
In case of a listed company, it will have to wait for at least
one year after its delisting.
The company is supposed to track the following procedure for such a conversion:
I. Publish a newspaper notice in two widely circulated dailies of the state
where the Registered office of the company is situated and get a no
objection letter from the majority unsecured creditors and all
secured creditors.
II. Convene a Board meeting for consideration of the proposal of conversion of
the company into a private company and prepare the proposal for alteration
of Articles or prepare a new set of Articles of Association meeting the
requirements of a private limited company.
III. Hold the Board meeting and obtain approval of the Board for the
proposal, fix up the day, date and time of holding the general meeting of the
company, approve notice and explanatory
statement and authority to sign notice. Contd.
….Conversion of a Public Company into a Private Company
I. Hold the general meeting on the fixed day and pass a special resolution
authorizing the conversion and for alteration of Articles of Association for
incorporation of the definition of a private company. The Articles shall be
suitably amended to include the basic restrictions applicable on a private
company and other provisions necessary thereto.
II. Obtain the approval of the Central Government as required by Section 31.
Proviso to Section 31 (1) provides that no resolution amending the Articles,
which has the effect of converting a public company into a private company,
shall be effective unless it has been approved by the Central Government.
III. File a printed copy of the Articles as altered with the Registrar of Companies
within one month of the date of receipt of the approval
of the Central Government.
If satisfied with the above procedure, the Registrar of Companies
(ROC) will issue a letter granting its approval for the conversion of a public
company into a private company and eventually shall issue fresh certificates
of incorporation consequent upon change of name after conversion of the
company from 'Public Company' to 'Private Company‘.
Limited and Unlimited Companies
A company may be limited or unlimited
Limited company A limited company is one wherein the liability of its
members is limited and may further be sub-classified as limited by shares or by
guarantee as discussed below:
Company limited by shares In this case, the liability of members is limited
to the extent of uncalled share capital. No member of company limited by the
shares can be called upon to pay more than the face value of shares or so much
of it as is remaining unpaid. Members have no liability in case of fully paid up
shares.
Company limited by the guarantee A company limited by guarantee is a
registered company having the liability of its members limited by its
memorandum of association to such amount as the members may respectively
thereby undertake to pay if necessary on liquidation of the company. The
liability of the members to pay the guaranteed amount arises only when the
company has gone into liquidation and not when it is a going concern. A
guarantee company may be a company with share capital or without share
capital.
Unlimited company . The liability of members of an unlimited company is
unrestricted. Therefore their liability is similar to that of the liability of the
partners of a partnership firm. However, Companies Act does not permit the
formation of an unlimited company.
Section 25 Companies
The Act through its express provisions may not allow the corporate
personality advantages in the following cases:
1. Reduction of number of members below the statutory minimum
[Section 45]. If at any time, the number of members of a company is
reduced below the statutory minimum (seven in the case of a public
company and two in the case of a private company), and the company
keeps on carrying its business beyond the six months, the privilege of
limited liability of shareholders is lost. The law pierces the corporate veil
and makes every person (who remains member with the company after
six months and is aware of that fact) jointly and severally liable for the
payment of debts, contracted during that time.
2. Misrepresentation in prospectus [Sections 62-63].Where a
prospectus includes any untrue statement, every director, promoter,
and every other person, who is a party to such prospectus shall be liable
to pay compensation to every person who subscribes for any shares or
debentures (on the faith of the prospectus) for any loss or damage he
may have sustained by reason or included therein the untrue statement.
Besides for any misrepresentation in the prospectus, every person who
authorised the issue of the prospectus shall be punishable with
imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine
which may extend to fifty thousand rupees, or with both. Contd.
….Under Statutory Provisions
3. Failure to return application money [Section 69] . If minimum
subscription of 90 per cent is not received within 90 days from closure of the
issue, all monies received from applicants for shares shall be forthwith repaid
to them without interest. And if any such money is not so repaid within
seventy days of the closing of the issue, the directors of the company shall be
personally (jointly and severally) liable to repay that money with interest at the
rate of 15 per cent per annum from the expiry of the seventieth day.
4. Misdescription of the company’s name [Section 147] . The Act provides
that if any officer of the company or other person acting on its behalf or
authorizes to be signed on behalf of the company signs any bill of exchange,
promissory note, endorsement, cheque or order (draft) for money in which the
companies name is not mentioned in legible letters, the signatory director shall
be punishable with a fine which may extend to five thousand Indian rupees and
shall be personally liable to the holder of the bill of exchange, hundi,
promissory note, cheque or order for money or goods, for the amount thereof,
unless it is duly paid by the company. Contd.
….Under Statutory Provisions
5. For investigation of ownership of company [Section 247].
Under Section 247, where it appears to the Central Government
that there is good reason so to do, it may appoint one or more
inspectors to investigate and report on the membership of any
company and other matters relating to the company, for the
purpose of determining the true persons who are or have been
financially interested in the success or failure of the company;
or who are or have been able to control or materially influence
the policy of the company.
6. Fraudulent or wrongful trading [Section 542]. If in the course
of the winding up it appears that any business of the company
has been carried on with intent to defraud creditors of the
company or any other persons or for any fraudulent purpose, any
persons who were knowingly parties to the carrying on of the
business in that manner shall be personally responsible.
Under Judicial Interpretations
In the absence of express statutory provisions, the corporate veil
may also be lifted under judicial interpretations. Following are the
some of the circumstances that fall under this category:
1. Prevention of fraud or improper conduct . The courts have
been more than prepared to pierce the corporate veil when they
feel that a fraud is or could be perpetrated behind the veil. The
courts will not allow the Salomon principle to be used as an
engine of fraud.
2. Group enterprises . Sometimes in the case of group of
enterprises the Salomon principle may not be adhered to and the
court may lift the veil in order to look at the economic realities of
the group itself. In DHN Food Distributors Ltd. vs Tower
Hamlets it has been said that the courts may disregard Salomon's
case whenever it is just and equitable to do so. In the above-
mentioned case the court of appeal thought that the case in
question was one suitable for lifting the corporate veil. Here the
three subsidiary companies were treated as a part of the same
economic entity or group and were entitled to compensation.
Contd.
….Under Judicial Interpretations
3. Where a company acts as agency for its shareholders . In the case of Bodrip vs
Solomon7 , Justice Vaughan Williams expressed that the company was nothing but an
‘agent’ of Solomon. ‘That the business was Mr. Solomon's business and no one else's;
that he chose to employ as agent a limited company; that he is bound to indemnify
that agent, the company and that this agent, the company has lien on the assets.
However on appeal to the House of Lords it was held that a company did not
automatically become an agent of the shareholder even if it was a one man company
and the other shareholders were dummies. A company having power to act as an agent
may do so as an agent for its parent company or indeed for all or any of the individual
members if it or they authorize it to do so.
4. Trust . The courts may pierce the corporate veil to look at the characteristics of the
shareholders. In the case of The Abbey, Malvern Wells Ltd vs. Ministry of Local
Government and Planning, where all the shares in a company held by educational
trusts and the management of the company was in the hands of the trustees, the court
lifted the corporate veil so as to impress the company’s property within the terms of
the trusts. The veil of incorporation was pierced in order to look into the terms on
which the trustees held the shares.
5. Determination of enemy character. In times of war the court is prepared to lift the
corporate veil and determine the nature of shareholding as it did in the Daimler Co.
Ltd. vs. Continental Tyres & Rubber Co. case where Germen shareholders held the
shares of an English company during the World War I.
6. Tax considerations. At times tax legislations warrant the lifting of the corporate veil.
The courts are prepared to disregard the separate legal personality of companies in
case of tax evasions or liberal schemes of tax avoidance without any necessary
legislative authority.