[Post by Suprotik Das, a 5th year law student at the Jindal Global Law School, Sonepat, Haryana.] April 13, 2017 marked a momentous event in the cross-border merger regime in India with the Ministry of Corporate Affairs notifying section 234 of the Companies Act, 2013 as well as amendments to the Companies (Compromises, Arrangements and Amalgamations) Rules, 2016 in the form of Rule 25A. Read...
Companies Act, 2013: Cross-Border Merger Provisions Notified
Under the previous Companies, Act, 1956 (sections 391-394) it was possible for a foreign company to merge with an Indian company, but an Indian company could not be merged with a foreign company. This was intended to ensure that the company that continues after the merger is an Indian company over which the Indian regulatory authorities continue to exercise control. This position was also...
Has SEBI Altered Its Position on the Question of “Control”?
The issue of what amounts to “control” for purposes of the SEBI Takeover Regulations has been a vexed one, and has eluded any form of resolution for nearly 15 years. In a paper titled “The Nature of the Market for Corporate Control in India”, I have sought to summarize the present position (footnotes omitted): Under Indian takeover regulation, it is possible to trigger the [mandatory bid rule...
SAT on Holding Period for Inter Se Promoter Transfers
Mandatory takeover offer requirements are subject to certain exemptions. One such exemption is when there is an inter se transfer of shares among promoters of a company, so long as certain conditions are satisfied. One such condition, stipulated in regulation 10(1)(a)(ii) of the SEBI (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations, 2011 (the “Takeover Regulations”), is that the...
MCA’s Notification for Enhanced Exemptions Under the Merger Control Regime
[Guest post by Varun Thakur, BA.LL.B fourth year student at National Law University, Jodhpur.] In a notification dated 27 March, 2017, the Central Government, exercising its powers under the Competition Act, 2002 (‘the Act’), has issued a notification containing certain clarifications for easing compliance under the merger control regime. These interpretations are aimed at ensuring the...
SEBI Order Denying Inter-se Promoter Transfer Exemption
[Guest post by Shashank Prabhakar, who is a lawyer with Finsec Law Advisors] The Whole Time Member of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) recently passed an order relating to an application under Regulation 11(5) of the SEBI (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations, 2011 (the Takeover Regulations) for exemption from making an open offer under Regulation 3(2)...
Supreme Court Reinforces Sanctity of a Takeover Offer
In what circumstances can a takeover offer, once made, be withdrawn? This issue has occupied the attention of the Supreme Court in two previous cases, Nirma Industries v. Securities and Exchange Board of India and Securities and Exchange Board of India v. Akshya Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. In these cases, the Supreme Court took a strict view and held that the acquirers were not permitted to withdraw...
The M&A Environment in Brazil – A Guide for Indian Acquirers
My learned colleague Rodrigo and I have written an article on the M&A environment in Brazil (from an Indian buyer’s perspective). It is available at and I have also excerpted it below. Background Brazil is the world’s fifth largest country and with an estimated population of 200 million, it is also the world’s fifth most populous country after China, India, USA and Indonesia. Brazil is a...
Supreme Court on Board Appointments During a Takeover Offer
Background In Securities and Exchange Board of India v. Burren Energy India Limited (decided on 2 December 2016), the Supreme Court of India was concerned with a couple of issues relating to the technical interpretation of the SEBI (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations, 1997 (the “1997 Regulations”). This case involved an indirect acquisition of shares by an English...
NCLT Denies Itself the Power to Dispense With Meetings in an Amalgamation
Hitherto, schemes of arrangement were carried out under sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 and the jurisdiction for sanction of the schemes was exercised by the relevant High Court. At the initial stage, the role of the High Court was to call for the meetings of various classes of shareholders and creditors to seek their approval to the scheme. It had been common practice for High...
Recent Comments