This will impact voting rights of all those companies whose preference share capital is larger than their equity capital. While the Act is silent on whether this will be with retrospective or prospective effect, corporate lawyers say if implemented retrospectively, the clause may even lead to many promoters losing control over their companies, as and when the rule is notified.
Ketan Dalal, joint leader, tax & regulatory services, PricewaterhouseCoopers, says, “There is no clarity yet on whether this provision (of giving voting rights) will apply to existing preference shares or to preference shares now issued. It seems totally inappropriate if applied with retrospective effect, since it would lead to critical unforeseen implications and would change the basis of the shareholder-company relationship. We hope there will be clarity on this issue soon.”
Many members of a committee set up by the ministry of corporate affairs have dissented to the move as it will impact voting rights of equity shareholders. Though Parliament has cleared the Act, all the rules it entails have not been notified yet.
Corporate lawyers say under the Companies Act, 1956, preference shareholders had a right to vote in two circumstances: one, where their rights were directly affected and two, when the dividend on such preference capital was due but remained unpaid for a specified period. The 2013 Act does not contain the second condition. “In a way, preference shareholders have a broader right to vote now on any matter where their rights get directly affected. The investing community and India Inc have a greater reason to be concerned in this regard,” says Aakash Choubey, partner, Khaitan & Co.
Earlier, Section 87 of the Companies Act, 1956, which gave the necessary voting rights to preference shareholders, did not apply to private companies (other than subsidiaries of public companies). Interestingly, this section now applies to all companies. “The import of this is very significant. There is considerable ambiguity where the investors who invested in preference shares and applied their rights on a ‘fully converted basis’ may no longer be able to rely on this provision, as the proportion of voting rights of equity and preference shareholders has to be the same as that of the equity to preference share capital,” Choubey adds.
With this change, lawyers say private equity and other investors must be more cautious so that the rights they seek in management are duly covered contractually.
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
Renews automatically, cancel anytime
Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans
Exclusive premium stories online
Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors


Complimentary Access to The New York Times
News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic
Business Standard Epaper
Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share


Curated Newsletters
Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox
Market Analysis & Investment Insights
In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor


Archives
Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997
Ad-free Reading
Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements


Seamless Access Across All Devices
Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app
)