Question 1

The Board of Directors of MNP Limited proposes to convert the company into a private limited company. Referring to the provisions of the Companies Act, 2013, advise on the following:

Accepted Answer

**Sub-part (i): Whether MNP Limited can be converted into a private company**

As per **Section 2(68) of the Companies Act, 2013**, a **private company** must limit its members to a maximum of **200**. However, while counting members for this purpose, the following are **excluded**:

1. Persons who are in the **employment of the company** (current employees).
2. Persons who, having been **formerly in employment**, were members while in employment and have **continued to be members** after cessation of employment.

Additionally, **joint holders** of shares are treated as a **single member**, irrespective of the number of persons holding jointly.

Applying these provisions to MNP Limited:

| Category | Persons | Counted as Members |
|---|---|---|
| Directors and their Relatives | 18 | **18** (counted) |
| Employees (current) | 26 | **Nil** (excluded) |
| Employees (shares allotted during employment) | 15 | **Nil** (excluded) |
| Joint holders (7 sets × 2) | 14 | **7** (each set = 1 member) |
| Other Members | 12 | **12** (counted) |
| **Effective Member Count** | | **37** |

Since the **effective member count is 37**, which is well within the statutory ceiling of **200 members** for a private company, **MNP Limited CAN be converted into a private limited company**.

Note: The conversion requires passing a **special resolution** and obtaining approval of the **National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT)** under **Section 14(1) of the Companies Act, 2013**.

**Sub-part (ii): Number of e…

Question 2

Advise the Company in this regard and compute the minimum amount to be allocated, if so required, taking into account the relevant provisions of the Companies Act, 2013.

Accepted Answer

**Applicability of CSR provisions for FY 2021-22:**

As per **Section 135(1) of the Companies Act, 2013**, every company is required to constitute a CSR Committee and mandatorily spend on CSR activities if, during the **immediately preceding financial year**, it satisfies ANY ONE of the following criteria:

- Net worth of **₹500 crore** or more, OR
- Turnover of **₹1,000 crore** or more, OR
- **Net profit of ₹5 crore** or more

For FY 2021-22, the 'immediately preceding financial year' is **FY 2020-21**.

Net Profit (before tax) for FY 2020-21 = **₹7.00 crore**, which exceeds ₹5 crore.

Therefore, **CSR provisions are mandatory** for SKIP Limited for FY 2021-22.

**Computation of Minimum CSR Amount:**

As per **Section 135(5) of the Companies Act, 2013**, the minimum CSR obligation is **2% of the average net profits** computed in accordance with **Section 198**, made during the **three immediately preceding financial years**.

However, the **proviso to Section 135(5)** provides that where a company has not completed three financial years since incorporation, the average shall be computed based on the financial years for which financial statements are available (i.e., the years it has been in existence).

Since SKIP Limited was incorporated on **01.04.2019**, only two preceding financial years are available as of FY 2021-22 — FY 2019-20 and FY 2020-21. Accordingly, average net profit is computed over **two years** only.

Net profit for CSR purposes is computed as per **Section…

Question 3

SKS Limited issued 8%, 1,50,000 Redeemable Preference Shares of ₹100 each in the month of May, 2010, which are to be redeemed within a period of 10 years. Due to the Covid-19 pandemic, the Company is neither in a position to redeem the preference shares nor in a position to comply with the terms of issue. The Company with the consent of the Preference Shareholders of 70% has moved an application to the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) to record approval to issue further redeemable preference shares equal to the amount due. Will the petition be approved by the Tribunal in the light of the provisions of the Companies Act, 2013? Can the company include the dividend unpaid in the above issue of redeemable preference shares?

Accepted Answer

**Will NCLT approve the petition?**

No, the NCLT petition will likely be **rejected**. Section 55(1) of the Companies Act, 2013 mandates that preference shares must be redeemed within a period not exceeding ten years from the date of their issue. Since these preference shares were issued in May 2010, they were due for redemption by May 2020. This is a statutory obligation that cannot be waived or extended by NCLT.

The company seeks to circumvent the redemption obligation by issuing fresh preference shares as a replacement—this is not permissible. Simply replacing unredeemed shares with new shares of equal value does not satisfy the mandatory redemption requirement. While Section 55(5) of the Companies Act, 2013 allows the **Central Government** to grant relief through Official Gazette notification on grounds of public interest, **NCLT lacks such authority** to override the redemption requirement.

Although COVID-19 constitutes genuine financial hardship, this alone is insufficient grounds for NCLT to override a statutory mandatory requirement. The company's proper alternatives are: (1) redeem preference shares from accumulated profits or proceeds of a fresh issue of ordinary shares; (2) apply to the Central Government under Section 55(5) citing public interest; or (3) approach NCLT under Section 230 (scheme of arrangement) if it seeks permanent modification of terms with formal shareholder approval—but even then, redemption cannot be indefinitely postponed.

**Can unpaid di…

Question 4

Ramu has given authority to Prem to buy certain goods at the market rate. Prem buys the goods at a higher rate than the market rate. However, Ramu accepted the purchase invoice at higher rate. Afterwards, Ramu comes to know that the goods purchased belonged to Prem himself. Decide, whether, Ramu is bound by ratification done?

Accepted Answer

**Ramu is NOT bound by ratification.**

Ratification is the act by which a principal accepts and adopts an unauthorized act performed by an agent on his behalf, thereby making it binding as if it were originally authorized. However, ratification cannot validate all unauthorized acts; certain conditions must be satisfied.

**Conditions for Valid Ratification (Section 228, Indian Contract Act, 1872):**
Ratification must relate to a transaction that the principal could have validly authorized. The act ratified must be lawful, and the principal must act with full knowledge of all material facts.

**Why Ratification Fails Here:**

**1. Excess of Authority – Price Differential:** Prem was specifically authorized to purchase goods at **market rate** only. By purchasing at a **higher rate**, Prem exceeded his authority. While excess of authority can ordinarily be ratified by the principal, ratification here is problematic due to the concurrent issue of self-dealing.

**2. Self-Dealing by Agent – Conflict of Interest:** The critical flaw is that the goods purchased **belonged to Prem himself**. An agent has a fiduciary duty to act in the principal's interest without conflict. When an agent sells his own goods to the principal, this constitutes a **breach of fiduciary duty** and is inherently fraudulent unless:
- The agent fully discloses the conflict of interest before the transaction, AND
- The principal, with full knowledge, expressly consents

No such disclosure or informed consent…

Question 5

Hani authorises Bharat, a merchant in Mumbai, to recover dues from Bankey & Co., Bharat instructs Deepak, a solicitor, to take legal proceedings against Bankey & Co. for recovery of the money. Explain the legal position of Deepak, referring provisions of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, related to agency.

Accepted Answer

**Nature of Deepak's Position:** Deepak is a **sub-agent** appointed by Bharat (the agent) to perform legal proceedings on behalf of Hani (the principal). A sub-agent is defined under **Section 192 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872**, as a person employed by an agent to act on behalf of the principal in the matter entrusted to the agent and who acts under the control of that agent.

**Validity of Sub-agency:** Bharat could appoint Deepak as a sub-agent because: (1) it is necessary and usual in the ordinary course of business to employ a solicitor for legal proceedings, satisfying the test under **Section 192**; (2) nothing in the question suggests Hani prohibited sub-agency; and (3) legal proceedings are specialized work requiring professional expertise, making sub-agency legally permissible under **Section 193**.

**Deepak's Responsibility to the Agent:** Under **Section 194 of the ICA, 1872**, Deepak is responsible to Bharat (his immediate principal/agent) for the due performance of his duties and for any misconduct. Bharat can hold Deepak liable for breach of instructions, negligence, or failure to recover the dues.

**Deepak's Responsibility to the Principal:** Under **Section 193**, Deepak is also directly liable to Hani (the original principal) if there is **express or implied assent** of the principal to the sub-agency. Since Bharat appointed Deepak in the ordinary course of recovering dues and legal action is customary in such situations, Deepak would be deemed to have…

Question 6

Examine the validity of the following statements with reference to the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881:

Accepted Answer

**Examination of Validity Under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881:**

**(i) When payment on an instrument is made in due course, both the instrument and the parties to it are discharged. — TRUE**

This statement is **valid and correct**. Section 89 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 expressly provides that when payment in due course is made on a negotiable instrument, the instrument is discharged and all parties to it are freed from liability. Payment "in due course" means payment made by the right person (the principal debtor or authorized agent), to the right person (the lawful holder), at the right time (when due), and in the correct manner. Once such payment is received, neither the debtor nor any prior party can be held liable on the instrument thereafter. The discharge is automatic and operates as a bar to any further action on the instrument.

**(ii) Alteration of rate of interest specified in the Promissory Note is not a material alteration. — FALSE**

This statement is **invalid**. Alteration of the rate of interest is unequivocally a **material alteration** under Section 87 of the Act. A material alteration is one that changes the liability or obligation of any party to the instrument. Since the rate of interest directly affects the debtor's obligation to pay interest and thus alters their total liability, changing it constitutes a material alteration. According to Section 88, when a material alteration is made without the consent of the affected parties, th…

Question 7

Beauty Limited obtained a working capital loan from a Nationalized Bank against the hypothecation of Stock & Accounts receivable of the Company. An instrument creating the charge was duly signed by the Company and the Bank. The Company is not willing to register the charges with the Registrar of Companies. In the light of the provisions of the Companies Act, 2013, discuss: Is there any provision empowering the Nationalized Bank (charge holder) to get the charges registered?

Accepted Answer

**Nature and Registration Requirement:** The charge created in the form of hypothecation of stock and accounts receivable falls within the scope of **charges requiring registration** under Section 77 of the Companies Act, 2013. Such charges must be registered with the Registrar of Companies (ROC) within 30 days of their creation.

**Company's Primary Responsibility:** Under Section 78(1) of the Companies Act, 2013, the company is primarily responsible for applying for registration of charges within 30 days from the date of creation of the charge.

**Bank's Right to Register:** However, Section 78(2) of the Companies Act, 2013 provides a crucial provision that empowers the **charge holder to apply for registration**. This section states that if the company fails to apply for registration, **"any person interested in the charge"** may apply for registration with the ROC. The Nationalized Bank, being the charge holder and creditor, is a person interested in the charge and therefore has the statutory power to apply for registration of the charge directly, notwithstanding the company's unwillingness.

**Procedure:** The Bank may file an application with the ROC along with the instrument creating the charge, affidavit of the charge holder, and other prescribed documents, and the Registrar shall register the charge if satisfied that the requirements are complied with.

**Consequences of Non-Registration:** Under Section 85 of the Companies Act, 2013, if the charge is not registered …

Question 8

Beauty Limited obtained a working capital loan from a Nationalized Bank against the hypothecation of Stock & Accounts receivable of the Company. An instrument creating the charge was duly signed by the Company and the Bank. The Company is not willing to register the charges with the Registrar of Companies. In the light of the provisions of the Companies Act, 2013, discuss: When can the Registrar refuse to register the charges in the present scenario?

Accepted Answer

Under the **Companies Act, 2013**, the Registrar can refuse to register a charge in the following circumstances as per **Section 82**:

**1. Non-delivery within Prescribed Time Period**: The Registrar shall refuse to register a charge if the particulars of the charge or certified copy of the instrument creating the charge are **not delivered within 30 days from the date of creation of the charge** (as required by Section 78). In the present scenario, since the Company is unwilling to register, if the documents are not filed within 30 days, the Registrar can refuse registration.

**2. Incomplete or Deficient Particulars**: If the particulars furnished to the Registrar do not contain all the information required under Section 78 (such as the date of creation, amount, description of assets charged, etc.), the Registrar can refuse registration.

**3. Defective Certification of Instrument**: If the certified copy of the instrument creating the charge is not properly authenticated or certified as per the prescribed requirements, registration can be refused.

**4. Non-payment of Prescribed Fees**: If the prescribed registration fees are not paid, the Registrar can refuse to register the charge.

**5. Illegality of Charge**: If the charge is created in contravention of the provisions of the Companies Act or other applicable laws, or if the Company lacks authority to create a charge on the specified assets (stock and accounts receivable in this case).

**Important Note**: Even if the …

Question 9

ABC Ltd. has declared dividend of ₹ 2/- per equity share in the general meeting. Mr. Suresh is holding 5000 equity shares of ₹ 10 face value each, on which ₹ 10,000 towards call money is unpaid. Discuss Whether the dividend amount payable to him be adjusted against such dues as per the provisions of the Companies Act, 2013? Give reasons for your answer.

Accepted Answer

**Answer: Yes, the dividend amount payable to Mr. Suresh can be adjusted against unpaid calls as per the provisions of the Companies Act, 2013.**

**Reasons for Adjustment:**

1. **No prohibition in Section 123**: Section 123 of the Companies Act, 2013, which governs declaration and payment of dividends, does not prohibit adjustment of dividend against unpaid calls. The section lays down conditions for dividend declaration (from free reserves or profits) but does not restrict the company's right to adjust/set-off moneys.

2. **Company's statutory right of set-off**: The Companies Act, 2013 (Schedule I – Model Articles) contains provisions allowing companies to maintain a lien on shares for unpaid calls and to adjust any amount due from a shareholder against moneys payable to them. This is a recognized right under the Act.

3. **Articles of Association authorization**: Most companies' Articles of Association (based on Model Articles in Schedule I) explicitly provide that the company may adjust/set-off unpaid calls against any dividend or other moneys due to the member. Unless the specific Articles prohibit it, such adjustment is permissible.

4. **Commercial protection**: This provision serves legitimate commercial purposes—protecting the company's interest in ensuring timely recovery of unpaid calls on shares.

**Calculation in the Given Case:**
Dividend payable to Mr. Suresh = 5,000 shares × ₹2/share = **₹10,000**
Unpaid calls = **₹10,000**
Amount adjustable = ₹10,000
Divide…

Question 10

XYZ Ltd. received a communication from Central Government for preparation of periodical financial results and also for limited review of such periodical financial results. The Board of Directors have raised an objection on the ground that as it is an unlisted company, periodical financial results need not to be prepared. Examine, referring the provisions of the Companies Act, 2013, in this regard.

Accepted Answer

The Board's objection that periodical financial results need not be prepared as XYZ Ltd is an unlisted company is **not entirely correct**. The requirement for periodical financial results is not limited to listed companies alone.

**Relevant Provisions:**

Under the Companies Act, 2013, the primary provisions governing periodical financial results are **Section 33** (which prescribes timelines for preparation of accounts) and **Rule 5 of the Companies (Accounts) Rules, 2014**, which specifically mandates preparation of periodical financial results.

**Applicability to Unlisted Companies:**

Rule 5 of the Companies (Accounts) Rules, 2014 applies not only to listed companies but also to **unlisted public companies** meeting prescribed thresholds. The rule requires periodical financial results to be prepared by companies whose securities are listed OR by unlisted public companies having:
- Net worth of ₹500 crore and above, OR
- Turnover of ₹500 crore and above

Additionally, as per amendments to Rule 5, **unlisted public companies** with paid-up capital of ₹10 crore and above or turnover of ₹100 crore and above must also prepare periodical financial results within specified timelines (typically 45 days for quarterly results and 60 days for half-yearly results).

**Classification of XYZ Ltd:**

The Board's assumption is based on the mistaken belief that being unlisted automatically exempts a company from preparing periodical financial results. This is incorrect. The actual exem…

Question 11

As per the financial statement as at 31.03.2021 the Authorized and Issued share capital of Manorama Travels Private Limited (the Company) is of ₹100 Lakh divided into 10 Lakh equity shares of ₹10 each. The subscribed and paid-up share capital as on date is ₹80 Lakh consisting of 8 Lakh equity shares of ₹10 each. The Company has reduced its share capital by cancelling 2 Lakh issued but unsubscribed equity shares during the financial year 2021-22, without obtaining the confirmation from the National Company Law Tribunal (the Tribunal). It is noticed that the Company had rendered its Memorandum of Association by passing the requisite resolution at the duly constituted meeting for the above purpose. When filing the relevant e-form the Practicing Company Secretary refused to certify the form fo…

Accepted Answer

**Relevant Provisions — Section 61 and Section 66 of the Companies Act, 2013**

The question requires examining whether the cancellation of 2 Lakh issued but unsubscribed equity shares by Manorama Travels Private Limited constitutes a **reduction of share capital** under Section 66 (requiring NCLT confirmation) or a **diminution of share capital** under Section 61(1)(d) (not requiring NCLT confirmation).

**Nature of the Transaction**

Under **Section 61(1)(d) of the Companies Act, 2013**, a company limited by shares may, if so authorised by its articles, alter its share capital by cancelling shares which have not been taken or agreed to be taken by any person and diminish the amount of its share capital by the amount of the shares so cancelled. Critically, **Section 61(2) expressly provides that such cancellation shall NOT be deemed to be a reduction of share capital** within the meaning of the Act.

In the present case, the 2 Lakh equity shares cancelled were **issued but unsubscribed** — i.e., no person had taken or agreed to take them. This squarely falls within the scope of Section 61(1)(d). The operation is therefore a **diminution of share capital**, not a reduction of share capital under **Section 66 of the Companies Act, 2013**.

**Validity of the Company's Decision**

The company's action is **valid and legally permissible** under Section 61(1)(d). This type of capital alteration does **not** require confirmation from the National Company Law Tribunal. The company w…

Question 12

The Board of Directors of ABC Limited are proposing to raise funds through the issue of equity shares. However due to the financial markets, the price per share and the number of shares to be issued are not finalised. As a financial adviser of the company, what would you suggest to the Board in this regard as per the provisions of the Companies Act, 2013?

Accepted Answer

**Suggestion: Issue of Red Herring Prospectus under Section 32 of the Companies Act, 2013**

Since the price per share and the number of shares to be issued are not yet finalized, the Board of Directors of ABC Limited should consider issuing a **Red Herring Prospectus (RHP)** as provided under **Section 32 of the Companies Act, 2013**.

**Meaning of Red Herring Prospectus:**
A Red Herring Prospectus is a prospectus which does **not include complete particulars** regarding the quantum of securities to be offered or the price at which such securities are offered. It is issued prior to the final prospectus to invite offers from the public, particularly used in the **book-building process**.

**Key Provisions under Section 32:**

**Filing with Registrar:** The company proposing to make an offer of securities may issue a Red Herring Prospectus prior to the issue of a final prospectus. The company shall **file the Red Herring Prospectus with the Registrar of Companies (ROC) at least 3 days before the opening of the subscription list** and the offer.

**Contents of RHP:** A Red Herring Prospectus shall carry the same obligations as are applicable to a prospectus. However, it may mention a **price band** (e.g., floor price and cap price) instead of a specific price. The number of securities may also be stated as a range.

**After Closure of Offer:** Upon the **closing of the offer**, the company shall file with the **Registrar of Companies and SEBI** a final prospectus stating:
- The…

Question 13

'A' draws a cheque for ₹5,000 in favour of 'B'. 'A' had sufficient funds in his bank account to meet it, when the cheque ought to be presented in the bank. The bank fails before the cheque is presented. Examine, under the Indian Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, whether 'A' is liable as per the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

Accepted Answer

**Applicable Provision: Section 84 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881**

**Section 84** of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 deals with the effect of the drawer's rights when a cheque is not presented within a reasonable time and the bank subsequently fails.

**Relevant Rule under Section 84:** Where a cheque is not presented for payment within a **reasonable time** of its issue, and the drawer (or person on whose account it is drawn) had the right — at the time when presentation was delayed beyond such reasonable time — to require the drawee bank to pay, and such drawer **suffers actual damage** through the delay, he is **discharged to the extent of such damage**. The damage is measured as the extent to which the drawer is a creditor of the failed bank for a larger amount than he would have been had the cheque been duly paid.

**Application to the given case:**

**Facts:** 'A' draws a cheque for ₹5,000 in favour of 'B'. At the time the cheque ought to have been presented, 'A' had sufficient funds (i.e., at least ₹5,000) in his bank account. However, 'B' does not present the cheque within a reasonable time. Before presentation, the bank fails.

**Analysis:** Since 'A' had sufficient funds (₹5,000) in the bank at the time presentation was due, and the bank subsequently failed before 'B' presented the cheque, 'A' has suffered actual damage equal to ₹5,000 — i.e., the amount he had deposited with the failed bank which is now lost due to the bank's failure. This damage oc…

Question 14

Explain the provision related to 'Effect of Repeal' as per the General Clauses Act, 1897.

Accepted Answer

**Section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897** governs the effect of repeal of any Act. The key principle is that **repeal does not erase the past legal effects** of the repealed Act. When an Act is repealed, the repeal shall not affect the previous operation of the Act or anything duly done or suffered under it. This means that all transactions, events, and acts that occurred during the operation of the repealed Act remain valid and enforceable.

Under this provision, **any office, appointment, instrument, rule, order, or notification** made under the repealed Act shall be deemed to have been made under the corresponding provision of the new Act, if such a corresponding provision exists. This ensures continuity of legal instruments without the need for re-enactment.

Further, **any legal proceeding** that could have been instituted or commenced under the repealed Act may be instituted or continued under the new Act. This protects the rights of parties to pursue remedies despite the repeal.

Regarding **offences and penalties**, any offence committed under the repealed Act may be prosecuted and punished under the new Act. However, the punishment cannot be **enhanced or made more severe** by virtue of the repeal. Additionally, **any penalty, forfeiture, or liability** incurred under the repealed Act is not affected by the repeal and shall remain enforceable.

The overarching purpose of Section 6 is to provide **legal continuity and protection** to all acts and transactions per…

Question 15

Examine the validity of the following statements under the provisions of the Indian Contract Act, 1872

Accepted Answer

**Examination of Statements under the Indian Contract Act, 1872:**

**(i) Creditor should proceed legal action first against the Principal Debtor and later against the surety - FALSE**

This statement is incorrect. Section 141 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 provides that the creditor is not bound to recover the debt from the principal debtor before proceeding against the surety. The creditor has the right to proceed against the surety immediately and simultaneously with the principal debtor. The creditor can sue the surety directly without first exhausting remedies against the principal debtor. This is a fundamental right of the creditor in suretyship contracts.

**(ii) A guarantee which extends to a single debt / specific transaction is called continuing Guarantee - FALSE**

This statement is incorrect. Section 129 of the Indian Contract Act defines a **continuing guarantee** as "a guarantee which extends to a series of transactions." Conversely, a guarantee extending to a **single debt or specific transaction** is called a **simple guarantee** or **specific guarantee**. These are two distinct types of guarantees with different characteristics. A continuing guarantee contemplates multiple or repeated transactions over time, whereas a simple guarantee covers only one particular transaction or debt.

**(iii) Variation which is not material and beneficial to the surety will not discharge him of his liability - TRUE**

This statement is correct. Section 133 states that if the …

Question 16

Healthcare Services Limited (the Bidder), bids the tender floated by Super Care Hospital (the Tenderer), attaching a cheque dated 01.04.2021 for ₹5,00,000/- towards earnest money deposit. Since the tender process was extended, the Tenderer returned the cheque expiring on 30.06.2021 to the Bidder for its resubmission after having revalidated by changing the date of the cheque to 01.07.2021. Accordingly, the revalidated cheque was resubmitted by the Bidder to the Tenderer. The cheque presented by the Tenderer to the banker. It was dishonoured by the bank. Examine, whether, the cheque altered with a new date shall be deemed a valid cheque binding the Bidder for payment as per The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881?

Accepted Answer

**Issue:** Whether a cheque on which the date has been altered (revalidated) constitutes a valid negotiable instrument binding the drawer (Bidder) under the **Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881**.

**Relevant Provision — Section 87 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881:**

Section 87 deals with the effect of **material alteration**. It provides that any material alteration of a negotiable instrument **renders it void** as against any party who was a party thereto at the time of the alteration and who does **not consent** to such alteration. However, the instrument remains valid as against any party who has consented to the alteration.

The key question is therefore two-fold: (i) Is a change of date a **material alteration**? and (ii) Was such alteration made with the **consent** of the Bidder (drawer)?

**Whether change of date is a material alteration:**

Yes. A change in the date of a cheque is a **material alteration** because the date directly affects the validity period (presentment window) of the cheque and alters the legal rights and obligations of the parties. This is well-settled under Section 87.

**Whether the Bidder consented to the alteration:**

In the present case, the Tenderer returned the cheque to the **Bidder** for revalidation. The Bidder itself changed the date from the original date to 01.07.2021 and **voluntarily resubmitted** the cheque to the Tenderer. The alteration was thus made either by the Bidder directly, or at the very minimum, with the **expre…

CA Inter Corp Laws

Drill 5 questions from this paper — instant grading

Worked Solution

Write it like this

1The skeleton

2Examiner-rewarded phrases

3Common trap

Worked Solution

Write it like this

1The skeleton

2Examiner-rewarded phrases

3Common trap

Worked Solution

Write it like this

1The skeleton

2Examiner-rewarded phrases

3Common trap

Category	Persons	Counted as Members
Directors and their Relatives	18	18 (counted)
Employees (current)	26	Nil (excluded)
Employees (shares allotted during employment)	15	Nil (excluded)
Joint holders (7 sets × 2)	14	7 (each set = 1 member)
Other Members	12	12 (counted)
Effective Member Count		37