COMP/135/2011 19/49 ORDER shareholder but they also make it clear that the transferor company does not own any assets or property of its own, not even office premises. 4.11. So far as the suggestion made by the shareholder about the alternate mode of presenting the result of the meeting is concerned, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the Chairman's report is presented on the record of the Court in consonance with the statutory format provided vide form No.39 under Company Court Rules, 1959 and that the company is duty bound to present the result of the meeting in the given format. It is also stated that the bifurcation of the shareholding patent would otherwise also have no impact on the result of the meeting and statutory compliance under Section 391(2) of the Companies Act, 1956. 5. Having regard to aforesaid aspects and on overall consideration of the provisions under the scheme and the reply – explanation tendered by the petitioner company by its affidavit it emerges that the objections raised by the said shareholder are satisfactorily explained or dealt with by the petitioner company. It also emerges that the said shareholder has not placed any material, data or details or any scientific base to support the objections and he has also not offered any suggestion supported by any material or data to justify the objections raised by him. Downloaded on : Fri Jan 27 19:33:28 IST 2023
Adani Response Page 368 Page 370