“SHORTHAND TRANSCRIPTIONS’ by Sir Kailash, Chandra, P-35, Eust of Kailash, New Jelhi TRANSCRIPTION No. 1 . Now, Sir, hon. Memiers will RECALL that the Bill was introduced nse Hionse Honse ofthe people on the _ 2nd / September, 1953. Tt Gas had along: history and, i ‘arm or another, it has /been before: he public Bein end of 1949. In the Statement-nf Objects oa and Reasops, / the variousstages through which the ~ BiThas passed since 1946 have been SUMMARISED and /Lnged not RECAPITULATE on this CCCASION the circumstances in which the then. Governmentof India took the decision in early (100) 1948 to INTE ATE an enquiry into the "efor of oux company law. T would remind hon,/Members that Between 1946 and 1948 the entire field of company lawiwas.carefully Yo heviewed by two DISTINGUISHED company LAW: TERS who wore appolnid torecommend the broad lines on which the present/Act should bo revised. ‘Their recommendations were examined in the then Ministry of Commerce and certain TENTATIVE departmental views which/EMERGED wer lated ina COMPREHENSIVE MEMO: recognised Fade and industrial associations, BAR “x. Aesociations, the High Jourts and (200) the State Governments. That bronghit us to the end of 1949. Am ‘Many representations on this memorandum/were duly received from Chembers of. Commerce, trade and industrial associations, ‘State Governments and dhe general public. At the end /of 1950, the Govern- ment of India appointed a Committee under the Chairmanship of Shri Bhaba to go! into the entire question of the revision ‘of the Companies Act, with efieularreference to's BEARIN Gon the develop ment /of trade and industry jn this country. “this Committee examined a large numberof witnesses in many paris of the (3007 country, and submitted its xeport i March 1952. ‘This repert again was cirealated to all State/Governments, Ciambers of Commerce, Trade Associations. High Courts and many other bodies. At the same. time, a Special Officer was/appointed inthe Departmentof Peonomic Affairs, Ministry of Finance, to examine the report, in the light of. the views / ‘yeceived from {he interested public #nd to submit proposals to jon of the present Act. The ilnow before the House is based largely or the RECOMMENDATIONS of the Company Law Committee modified in 4 few particulars. (400)‘SHORTHAND TRANSCRIPTIONS’ by Sir Kailash Chandra, F-36, Bast of Kailash, Nr. Delhi (back of 1) C Sige | 2 Ne Hon. Members will notice that so far as public relations go, the Bill has covered adequate ground. Ina measure/like the Companies Bill, however, which covers the entire field of the operation of joint stock companies, the limits of / consultation and discussion ean never be EXHAUSTED, and I would like to in. form hon. Members that although the Bill was j introduced in Parliament over seven months ago, our officers have been engaged throughout this period in further studies and informal / discussions with the interests concerned, and on occasions | have also PARTICIPATED in such discussions. T have also given some (500) further thought to some -of the issues arising out of the Bil) and I propose at the appropriate stage to./ bring before the Select ” Committee any changes in the provisions of the Bill which seem tome to be WORTHY /-of consideration in the light of this further examination: No hon. Members will have noticed thatthe Bill contains 6} ‘clauses and 12 SCHEDULES. Lthink it is probably » - one ofthe longest legislative measures in recentleg- dslative history. But / its size might be regarded as imisleading unless make. few comments. The Bilis ‘both, one: must remember, (600) a. INSOLIDATING SG A LL BQ sees A, Sndamending measure. As mentioned inthe Stem. — Nous. Barner he. 23a GL, Ment of Objects and Reasons, this is the first oppor- SK AV 0 pce tunity which [has OCCURRED since 1923 fe the Ne consolidation of the Companies Aet, Advantage has been taken of / this opportunity to redraft several long and COMPLICATED sections inthe present Act which have been SPLIT UP into a lange number of clauses. This isthe largest single factor accountable for the inerease in the number of clausesin / the Bill: New clauses EMBODYING SUBSTANTIAL changes in the present Taw would hardly constitute more than 2 small fraction of (700) the Bill. iwould also draw attention to the structuval changes in the Bill to which a reference has been / made in the Statement of Objects and Reasons. ‘The redraft of the Bill and the REARRANGEMENT ofthe existing chapters / in the Companies Act in a more LOGICAL order have, I think, resulted ina NOTICE. ABLE improvement in the form / of the Bill and 1 hope will FACILITATE better understanding and sbpreciation of the scheme. Lwish that the Act / which came into effect long ago was implemented properly. L_know that the Minister here is very EARNEST in implementing (800) it, but unforta. nately his COLLEAGUES af the State Jevel are dis. appointing him. Unfortunately, no steps have heen taken for ING / or TONING UP the admini- stration at the State level and at the district levels They have to be taken immediately. (840 words)“SHORTHAND TRANSCRIPTIONS! by Sir Kailash Chandra, F-35, Bast of Kailash, New Delhi TRANSCRIPTION No. 2 cA &. nn Lshould like now to make a few OBSERVA- {TIONS on the Budget. This Budget mariss a turn: é us ye * ing point in the / history of our country. [iis no ¢-~ use attempting, as some of my ‘riends have done, either to D) ECATE the / budget very strongly or to suggest that we are not witnessing a new yevolution in our methods of fiscal training /and TECHNIQUE. I want it to be quite clearly pointed "Oil fo my Tends that we are now facing the / LEAN years of Indian. finance. HITHERTO, we had revenue surpiuscs which were a form of public saving and which were (100) meant to be ~ utilised for capital development. HEREAFTER, senyyf a this forn: of revenue surplus would not be available. ee We-have, therefore, /tc find out ways and means Fen trnnrn ofimplementing ourgreat programme ofnational reconstruction at minimum cost. My point is that (the deficit on revenu account would be of the ‘order of about Rs. 19 to 20 crores. Here, let me f point out that I do not agree with those of my friends in the Finance Department who have v—y— attempted to / sugges that Rs. 9 or 18 crores ” “which are obtained frem Pakistan should be put to the revenue side (200) of the budget; they are to be puton the capital side. But that does not seriously alter the trend/of my argument. What.I am suggesting is that we would have to be pre- pared for a deficit of a ‘much higher order even on the revenue side. Tat itself should make us realise that there are very manv problems / which we haye to face and that we have to underiake ways and means of increasing the resources of our / country so that itiaight be possible for us to have a greater amoun! of surplus or a greater amount (300) of public saving for the purnose of financing capital development, The Finance Minister in the course cf his speech, Mr. / Deputy Minister, pointed out that the deficits during the past two vears were of the order of Rs. 83 / crores. Lventuze humbly fo disagree with him beeause T feel that when we are te Iking of deficits, we must | take into account the OVERALL deficit IN- CURRED by the Central Government and that would be of the order off 8s.200 crores. During the years of; light expenditure we had 0. SHORTFALL of about Es, 200 crores. (400) SieRS SSD i)