Case List: Articles of Association vs. Shareholders Agreements – Which one prevails?

ByVivek Kumar Verma
Section 36 of the Companies Act, 1956 makes the Memorandum and Articles of Company, when registered, binding not only on the company but also the members inter-se to the same extent as if they had been signed by the company and by each member and covenanted to by the company and each shareholder to observe all the provisions of the Memorandum and of the Articles. The Articles of Association constitute a contract not merely between the shareholders and the company but between the individual shareholders also. The Articles are a source of powers of the Directors who can as a result exercise only those powers conferred by the Articles in accordance therewith. Any action referable to the Articles and contrary thereto would be ultra vires.

Case List

  • Smt. Claude-Lila Parulekar vs. Sakal Papers Pvt. Ltd. and Ors., 2005, Supreme Court; (2005)11SCC73
  • L. Chandramurthy vs. Pearl Metal Products Private Limited and Ors., 2008, CLB; [2009]149CompCas291(CLB)
  • AIDQUA Holdings (Mauritius) Inc. vs. Tamil Nadu Water Investment Company Ltd.,2014, Madras High Court; (2014)4MLJ429

Similar Posts
|

Rules for Interpretation of Contracts: Implied Terms of Contract

ByVivek Kumar Verma

Conditions for using ‘Implied Terms’ for Interpretation  Lord Simon in BP Refinery (Westernport) Pty Ltd vs. The Shire of Hastings [1978] 52 AJLR 20 held that- “…for a term to be implied, the following conditions (which may overlap) must be satisfied: it must be reasonable and equitable; it must be necessary to give business efficacy to the…

|

Mohanlal Jagannath v. Kashiram Gokul

ByVivek Kumar Verma

Mohanlal Jagannath v. Kashiram Gokul AIR 1950 Nag 71 (74) [Indian Contract Act (ICA), Section(s): 16, 23, 24] FACTS: Panchas delivered an award under which defendant was to convey half of his share in his inherited property to his uncle who was to pay defendant’s share of debt, payable by him. Defendant consented to this award in return for…

|

Bhagwandas Goverdhandas Kedia v. M/s. Girdharilal Parshottamdas

ByVivek Kumar Verma

Bhagwandas Goverdhandas Kedia v. M/s. Girdharilal Parshottamdas 1966 AIR 543 (S.3 and 4, place of formation of contract, postal rule) FACTS: Plaintiff offered to get certain goods supplied at Ahmedabad to defendants who accepted the offer at Khamgaon. On defendants’ failure to supply requisite goods, plaintiff sued them at Ahmedabad. Dispute arose as to where…

|

Saunders v. Anglia Building Society

ByVivek Kumar Verma

Saunders v. Anglia Building Society [1970] 3 All ER 961 (non-est factum principle) PRINCIPLE: In order for the defense of non-est factum to succeed, the person must show that the transaction which he signed was essentially different in substance or in kind from the one which he purported to sign. Earlier it was thought that this defense could not…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *