Section 105: Restriction on voting rights

Companies Act • Official Statutory Text & Practice Guide

Statutory Regulation
Legal Standard
Competent Court / Tribunal
Act 2013
Statutory Defined Terms in this Section: (Click any term for official legal definition)

Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 105

Section 105 codifies the fundamental statutory right of every member entitled to attend and vote at a company meeting to appoint a proxy, regulating proxy qualifications, the mandatory 48-hour lodging rule, and members' rights to inspect proxy instruments prior to the meeting.

  • Statutory Right of Proxy Appointment: Confers an absolute statutory entitlement on every member entitled to vote to appoint another person (who need not be a member) as their proxy to attend and vote on their behalf on a poll.
  • Statutory Limitations on Proxies: A proxy has no right to speak at the meeting and cannot vote on a show of hands; furthermore, no individual can act as proxy for more than fifty members or members holding over 10% of total voting capital.
  • Mandatory 48-Hour Lodging Window: Instruments appointing proxies (Form MGT-11) must be deposited at the registered office at least 48 hours before the meeting; any provision in the Articles requiring an earlier lodging deadline is void.
  • Inspection Rights of Members: Vests members with the statutory right to inspect all deposited proxies upon giving at least three days' advance notice, starting 24 hours before the meeting until its conclusion.
Key Landmark Precedents:
  • Vivekananda v. Vijaya Bank, (1991) 71 Comp Cas 489 (Kar): The Karnataka High Court held that the right to appoint a proxy is a mandatory statutory right that cannot be fettered or restricted by company articles; any article requiring proxies to be deposited earlier than 48 hours is invalid.
  • Cousins v. International Brick Co. Ltd., [1931] 2 Ch 90: Landmark ruling: held that the appointment of a proxy does not deprive the shareholder of the personal right to attend and vote; if the shareholder attends the meeting and casts a vote in person, the proxy's authority is automatically revoked and superseded.
  • Swadeshi Polytex Ltd. v. V.M. Rao, (1987) 62 Comp Cas 848 (SC): The Supreme Court examined the validity and scrutiny of proxy forms in bitter corporate control contests, affirming that technical, non-prejudicial defects in proxy forms cannot be used by the board to disenfranchise voting rights.
Courtroom Practice & Strategic Litigation Guidance:

In proxy battles during contested EGMs, issue a Section 105(8) notice demanding inspection of all proxies lodged by rival factions at least three days before the meeting. During the 24-hour pre-meeting inspection window, systematically examine Form MGT-11 submissions for missing revenue stamps, mismatched specimen signatures, or proxies exceeding the 50-member / 10% voting cap, lodging formal written objections before voting commences.