Title Dheera test -3 Answerkey.Pdf (1).pdf ✅

CA INTERMEDIATE BRIDGE TEST SERIES – September 2025 EXAMS Corporate Laws & Other Laws Test -3 [1] www.dheeratests.com Part -A 1. 1) B Explanation: As per Section 106(1), the articles of a company may restrict voting rights of members who have not paid any calls or other sums due on shares held by them. Since ₹5 per share was unpaid final call money, the restriction is valid. Caution: Students confuse Section 106 with a blanket right to vote. Option (a) is wrong: Section 106 specifically allows restriction for unpaid call money through Articles of Association. 2) A Explanation: As per Section 105(4), the proxy form must be deposited at least 48 hours before the meeting. Since the AGM was on 27th August, the last time for submission was 25th August 11:59 AM. As the form was received on 25th, the exact time matters. If it was post 11:59 AM, it’s invalid. Caution: Assuming "25th August" is valid irrespective of time. Ignoring the 48-hour rule being strict and exact. 3) A Explanation: As per Section 110 read with Rule 22 of Companies (Management and Administration) Rules, certain resolutions must be passed only by postal ballot. However, once a resolution is passed at AGM, it cannot be re-demanded via postal ballot. Their request is not valid after AGM. Caution: Confusing the shareholder requisition rights under Section 100 with postal ballot rules. Believing majority shareholders can force postal ballot at any time, which is incorrect.

CA INTERMEDIATE BRIDGE TEST SERIES – September 2025 EXAMS Corporate Laws & Other Laws Test -3 [3] www.dheeratests.com 3. C Explanation: Section 92(3) states that a copy of the Annual Return shall be placed on the company’s website and the web link shall be disclosed in the Board’s Report. MGT-9 (Extract of Annual Return) was earlier required to be attached with Board’s Report under Rule 12(1), but this was omitted via Companies (Amendment) Act, 2017, made effective from 28.08.2020. Now, if the Annual Return is placed on the website and the web link is mentioned in the Board’s Report, then MGT-9 is not required. The company filed MGT-7 within 60 days of AGM (AGM on 28 Sep → filing on 15 Nov), and included MGT-8 as paid- up share capital > ₹10 crore and turnover > ₹50 crore. Hence, no violation of Section 92 has occurred. Caution: Confusing 60-day limit — here it's within time (28 Sep + 60 days = 27 Nov). MGT- 9 is not mandatory post amendment; students may follow outdated rule. MGT-8 is mandatory for listed companies — SEBI filing ≠ ROC compliance. 4. B Explanation: When a special provision and a general provision both apply to a situation, the special provision will prevail, even if the general one was enacted later. Caution: Time of enactment is irrelevant. Specific law does not become void. It remains applicable within its narrow scope. Uniformity doesn't override specificity. The law respects intention and precision over generality.
Dheera Test Series [4] www.dheeratests.com Part – B Question No 1A Provision: As per Section 119 of the Companies Act, 2013: Inspection Right: The minutes of every general meeting (AGM/EGM) shall be kept at the Registered Office and shall be open during business hours to the inspection of any member without charge. Copy Right: Any member shall be entitled to get copies of such minutes within seven working days after request, on payment of such fees as may be prescribed (₹10 per page as per Rule 27 of Companies (Management and Administration) Rules, 2014). Time Frame: Minutes must be entered within 30 days of the meeting. Non-compliance Penalty: Company and every officer in default are liable for penalty up to ₹25,000. Analysis: In the present case, the company: • The AGM was held on 20th Sep 2023. Minutes were signed on 29th Sep, which is within the 30-day limit — Compliant. • Mr. Jayant’s request on 11th Dec 2023 is within reasonable time and does not violate any time limitation. Section 119 does not impose a time-bar for inspection or copy request post-meeting. • His request to inspect the minutes is valid — the company cannot impose a 30-day prior notice requirement; the law only states “during business hours”. • Refusal to courier a certified copy is also invalid. Section 119 allows sending copies on payment of prescribed fee, no restriction on delivery method is specified Conclusion: • The company’s denial of Mr. Jayant’s request is not in accordance with Section 119. The shareholder had a statutory right to inspect and receive copies, and the company’s conditions are arbitrary and legally untenable. • The company and its officers (including CS and Chairman) are liable to penalty under Section 119(3). 0.5 M 0.5 M 0.5 M 0.5 M 0.5 M 0.5 M 0.5 M 0.5 M 0.5 M 0.5 M