- Legal Research
- Find a Lawyer
- Hall of Fame
- Professional Services
- Legal Consultation
- Legal Help
Sec284 - Removal of directors.
(1) A company may, by ordinary resolution, remove a director (not being a director appointed by the Central Government in pursuance of section 408) before the expiry of his period of office:
Provided that this sub-section shall not, in the case of a private company, authorise the removal of a director holding office for life on the 1st day of April, 1952, whether or not he is subject to retirement under an age limit by virtue of the articles or otherwise:
Provided further that nothing contained in this sub-section shall apply where the company has availed itself of the option given to it under section 265 to appoint not less than two-thirds of the total number of directors according to the principle of proportional representation.
(2) Special notice shall be required of any resolution to remove a director under this section, or to appoint somebody instead of a director so removed at the meeting at which he is removed.
(3) On receipt of notice of a resolution to remove a director under this section, the company shall forthwith send a copy thereof to the director concerned, and the director (whether or not he is a member of the company) shall be entitled to be heard on the resolution at the meeting.
(4) Where notice is given of a resolution to remove a director under this section and the director concerned makes with respect thereto representations in writing to the company (not exceeding a reasonable length) and requests their notification to members of the company, the company shall, unless the representations are received by it too late for it to do so,---
(a) in any notice of the resolution given to members of the company, state the fact of the representations having been made; and
(b) send a copy of the representations to every member of the company to whom notice of the meeting is sent (whether before or after receipt of the representations by the company);
and if a copy of the representations is not sent as aforesaid because they were received too late or because of the companys default, the director may (without prejudice to his right to be heard orally) require that the representations shall be read out at the meeting:
Provided that copies of the representations need not be sent out and the representations need not be read out at the meeting if, on the application either of the company or of any other person who claims to be aggrieved, the Company Law Board is satisfied that the rights conferred by this sub-section are being abused to secure needless publicity for defamatory matter; and the Company Law Board may order the companys costs on the application to be paid in whole or in part by the director notwithstanding that he is not a party to it.
(5) A vacancy created by the removal of a director under this section may, if he had been appointed by the company in general meeting or by the Board in pursuance of section 262, be filled by the appointment of another director in his stead by the meeting at which he is removed, provided special notice of the intended appointment has been given under sub-section (2). A director so appointed shall hold office until the date up to which his predecessor would have held office if he had not been removed as aforesaid.
(6) If the vacancy is not filled under sub-section (5), it may be filled as a casual vacancy in accordance with the provisions, so far as they may be applicable, of section 262, and all the provisions of that section shall apply accordingly:
Provided that the director who was removed from office shall not be reappointed as a director by the Board of directors.
(7) Nothing in this section shall be taken :
(a) as depriving a person removed thereunder of any compensation or damages payable to him in respect of the termination of his appointment as director or of any appointment terminating with that as director; or
(b) as derogating from any power to remove a director which may exist apart from this section.
The current Legal Luminaries of India, the credible names in the legal circle along with those who would be the leading stars of the next decade. These are some of the reliable names in field of law. Nominate the Legal Stars of tomorrow
Sudha Mishra vs. Surya Chandra Mishra( R.F.A 299 of 2014
The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in Sudha Mishra vs. Surya Chandra Mishra (R.F.A 299 of 2014)has ruled that a woman has a right over the property of her husband but she cannot claim a right to live in the house of her parents-in-law
Helpline Law provides a user friendly compendium of Indian Law & Bare Acts. Get a complete list & detail of Indian Bare Acts, with amendments and repeals. It comes with easy-to-use features like Search by bare acts & by year. You can even email the information to yourself!