Source: https://www.legalbites.in/memorandum-of-association/
Timestamp: 2019-04-25 02:48:00+00:00

Document:
The Memorandum of Association is a document which sets out the constitution of a company and is therefore the foundation on which the structure of the company is built. It defines the scope of the company’s activities and its relations with the outside world.
The first step in the formation of a company is to prepare a document called the memorandum of association. In fact, memorandum is one of the most essential pre-requisites for incorporating any form of company under the Act. This is evidenced in Section 3 of the Act, which provides the mode of incorporation of a company and states that a company may be formed for any lawful purpose by seven or more persons, where the company to be formed is a public company; two or more persons, where the company to be formed is a private company; or one person, where the company to be formed is a One Person Company by subscribing their names or his name to a memorandum and complying with the requirements of this Act in respect of its registration.
To subscribe means to append one’s signature or mark a document as an approval or attestation of its contents.
According to Section 2(56) of the Companies Act, 2013 “memorandum” means the memorandum of association of a company as originally framed and altered from time to time in pursuance of any previous company law or this Act.
Section 4 of the Act specifies in clear terms the contents of this important document which is the charter of the company. The memorandum of association of a company contains the objects to pursue which the company is formed It not only shows the objects of formation but also determines the scope of its operations beyond which its actions cannot go. “THE MEMORANDUM OF ASSOCIATION”, observed Palmer, “is a document of great importance in relation to the proposed company”.
Section 4(6) of the Companies Act, 2013 provides that the memorandum of association should be in any one of the Forms specified in Tables A, B, C, D or E of Schedule I to the Act, as may be applicable in relation to the type of company proposed to be incorporated or in a Form as near thereto as the circumstances admit.
(v) the Form in Table E is applicable to unlimited companies having a share capital.
A company shall adopt any of the model Forms of the memorandum of association mentioned above, as may be applicable to it.
(f) in the case of a One Person Company, the name of the person who, in the event of the death of the subscriber, shall become the member of the company.
According to section 4(7), any provision in the memorandum or articles, in the case of a company limited by guarantee and not having a share capital, purporting to give any person a right to participate in the divisible profits of the company otherwise than as a member, shall be void. The above clauses are compulsory and are designated as “conditions” prescribed by the Act, on the basis of which a company is incorporated.
A company being a legal entity must have a name of its own to establish its separate identity. The name of the company is a symbol of its independent corporate existence. The first clause in the memorandum of association of the company states the name by which a company is to be known. The company may adopt any suitable name provided it is not undesirable.
Section 4(5)(i) lays down that upon receipt of an application under sub-section (4), the Registrar may, on the basis of information and documents furnished along with the application, reserve the name for a period of 60 days from the date of the application.
The Registrar must make preliminary enquiries to ensure that the name allowed by him is not misleading or intended to deceive with reference to the Objects Clause of the memorandum [Methodist Church v. Union of India, (1985) 57 Com Cases 443 (Bombay)]. The Registrar is not, however, required to carry out any elaborate investigation at the time of registration of the company. Unless the purpose of the company appears to be unlawful ex-facie or is transparently illegal or prohibited by any statute, it cannot be regarded as an unlawful association [T.V. Krishna v. Andhra Prabha (P) Ltd., (1960) 30 Com Cases 437 (AP)].
The object is to prevent the use of a name likely to mislead the public. For example, a company is not allowed to use a name which is prohibited under the Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Act, 1950, or suggestive of any connection with Government or of State patronage where there is none.
The name of the company and the address of its registered office must be painted or displayed outside every office or place at which its business is carried on, in a conspicuous position and in legible letters in English and in the language in general use in that locality. The name must also be engraved on the company’s common seal. Further, the name of the company and the address of the registered office and the Corporate Identity Number along with telephone number, fax number, if any, e-mail and website addresses, if any must be mentioned in legible characters in all business letters, in all its bill heads, letter papers and in all its notices and other official publications, as well as in all negotiable instruments and other prescribed documents (Section 12).
However, where a company has changed its name or names during the last two years, it shall paint or display or print, as the case may be, along with its name, the former name or names so changed during the last two years as required above.
Further in case of One Person Company, the words ‘‘One Person Company’’ shall be mentioned in brackets below the name of such company, wherever its name is printed, affixed or engraved.
Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA) has clarified that display of its name in English in addition to the display in the local language will be a sufficient compliance with the requirements of the section.
The MCA has also clarified that a share certificate is not an official publication of a company within the meaning of Section 147 of the Act [Corresponds to section 12 of the Companies Act, 2013] [Circular No. 3/73/8/10(147)/ 72-CC-V dated 3.2.1973].
The words ‘outside of every office’ do not mean outside the premises in which the office is situated [Dr. H.L. Batliwalla Sons & Company Ltd. v. Emperor (1941) 11 Com Cases 154 : AIR 1941 (Bom.) 97]. Where office is situated within a compound, the display outside the office room, though inside the building, is sufficient. The details of Companies (incorporation) Rules 2013 in this regard is dealt in detail in Lesson 3 of the Institute.
The name of the State in which the registered office of the company is to be situated must be given in the memorandum. But the exact address of the registered office is not required to be stated therein. Within 15 days of its incorporation, and at all times thereafter, the company must have a registered office to which all communications and notices may be sent. The company must also furnish to the Registrar verification of its registered office within a period of thirty days of its incorporation in such manner as may be prescribed.
The third compulsory clause in the memorandum sets out the objects for which the company has been formed. Under section 4(1)(c) of the Companies Act, 2013, all companies must state in their memorandum the objects for which the company is proposed to be incorporated and any matter considered necessary in furtherance thereof.
The objects clause is of great importance because it determines the purpose and the capacity of the company. It indicates the purpose for which the company has been set up and its actual capability, besides its sphere of activities. It states affirmatively the ambit and extent of powers of the company and, stated negatively, that nothing should be done beyond that ambit and that no attempt shall be made to use the company for any other purpose than that which is specified. The purpose of the objects clause is to enable the persons dealing with the company to know its permitted range of activities. The acts beyond this ambit are ultra vires and hence void. Even the entire body of shareholders cannot ratify such acts.
Although express powers are necessary, a company may do anything which is incidental to and consequential upon the powers specified, and the act will not be ultra vires [Attorney General v. G.E. Rly. Co., (1880) 5 A.C. 473]. Thus, a trading company has an implied power to borrow money, draw and accept bills of exchange in the ordinary form, but a railway company cannot issue bills although it may borrow money.
The subscribers to the memorandum of association enjoy almost unrestricted freedom to choose the objects.
The only restriction is that objects should not be illegal and against the provisions of the Companies Act, 2013.
It is on the basis of the main objects clause that the concerned Registrar of Companies enquires as to the objects intended to be pursued by the company either immediately or within a reasonable time after its incorporation. The Registrar must satisfy himself by reference to certain documents, information or explanations furnished by the company.
must be read fairly and its importance derived from a reasonable interpretation of the language which it employs” [Egyptian Salt and Soda Co. Ltd. v. Port Said Salt Association Ltd. AC 677: (1931) 1 Com Cases 285: AIR 1931 PC 182; 62 MLJ 163; Deuchar v. Gas, Light and Coke Co., (1925) AC 691)]. The natural and ordinary meaning of the language used in several clauses should be taken into consideration for determining whether a particular transaction does or does not fall within the objects stated in the memorandum [Bell Houses Ltd. v. City Wall Properties Ltd. (1966) 36 Com Cases 779: (1966) 2 All ER 674 (CA)].
It is ultra vires for a company to act beyond the limits of its memorandum. Any attempted departure will be invalid and cannot be validated even if assented to by all the shareholders of the company. Ultra vires means an act or transaction of a company, which though it may not be illegal, is beyond the company’s powers by reason of not being within the objects of the memorandum of association. The memorandum is, so to speak, the limit beyond which a company cannot travel. [Ashbury Railway Carriage and Iron Company v. Riche,(1875) LR 7 HL 653]. The Memorandum of Association is the ‘Lakshman Rekha’ for a company. An act beyond the objects mentioned in the memorandum is ultra vires and void and cannot be ratified [Dr. Lakshmanaswami Mudaliar A. v. LIC (1963) Comp LJ 248: 1963 33 Com Cases 420: AIR 1963 SC 1185].
Where no connection or nexus exists between the exercise of a power and the attainment of an object, exercise of power will be ultra vires [Radha Cinema & Co. v. Chitralipi Films, 1974 Tax LR 2180 (Cal)].
In the case of a company whatever is not stated in the memorandum as the objects or powers is prohibited by the doctrine of ultra vires. As a result, an act which is ultra vires is void, and does not bind the company. Neither the company nor the contracting party can sue on it. Also, as stated earlier, the company cannot make it valid, even if every member assents to it.
The general rule is that an act which is ultra vires the company is incapable of ratification. An act which is intra vires the company but outside the authority of the directors may be ratified by the company in proper form [Rajendra Nath Dutta v. Shilendra Nath Mukherjee, (1982) 52 Com Cases 293 (Cal.)].
The rule is meant to protect shareholders and the creditors of the company. If the act is ultra vires (beyond the powers of) the directors only, the shareholders can ratify it. If it is ultra vires the articles of association, the company can alter its articles in the proper way.
The memorandum of the company in the said case defined its objects thus: “The objects for which the company is established are to make and sell, or lend or hire, railway plants………… to carry on the business of mechanical engineers and general contractors………..”.
The company entered into a contract with M/s. Riche, a firm of railway contractors to finance the construction of a railway line in Belgium. On subsequent repudiation of this contract by the company on the ground of its being ultra vires, Riche brought a case for damages on the ground of breach of contract, as according to him the words “general contractors” in the objects clause gave power to the company to enter into such a contract and, therefore, it was within the powers of the company. More so because the contract was ratified by a majority of shareholders.
The House of Lords held that the contract was ultra vires the company and, therefore, null and void. The term “general contractor” was interpreted to indicate as the making generally of such contracts as are connected with the business of mechanical engineers. The Court held that if every shareholder of the company had been in the room and had said, “That is a contract which we desire to make, which we authorise the directors to make”, still it would be ultra vires. The shareholders cannot ratify such a contract, as the contract was ultra vires the objects clause, which by Act of Parliament, they were prohibited from doing.
However, later on, the House of Lords held in other cases that the doctrine of ultra vires should be applied reasonably and unless it is expressly prohibited, a company may do an act which is necessary for or incidental to the attainment of its objects. Section 13(1)(d) of the Companies Act, 1956 [Corresponds to section 4(1)(c) of the Companies Act, 2013] provides that the objects for which the company is proposed to be incorporated and any matter considered necessary in furtherance thereof be stated in the memorandum.
However, even when the matters considered necessary in furtherance of the objects are not stated, they would be allowed by the principle of reasonable construction of the memorandum.
(i) Void ab initio – The ultra vires acts are null and void ab initio. The company is not bound by these acts. Even the company cannot sue or be sued upon [Ashbury Railway Carriage and Iron Company v. Riche ].
Ultra vires contracts are void ab initio and hence cannot become intra vires by reason of estoppel or ratification.
(ii) Injunction: The members can get an injunction to restrain a company wherein ultra vires act has been or is about to be undertaken [Attorney General v. Gr. Eastern Rly. Co., (1880) 5 A.C. 473].
(iii) Personal liability of Directors: It is one of the duties of directors to ensure that the corporate capital is used only for the legitimate business of the company and hence if such capital is diverted to purposes alien to the company’s memorandum, the directors will be personally liable to replace it. In Jehangir R. Modi v. Shamji Ladha, [(1866-67) 4 Bom. HCR (1855)], the Bombay High Court held, “A shareholder can maintain an action against the directors to compel them to restore to the company the funds of the company that have by them been employed in transactions that they have no authority to enter into, without making the company a party to the suit”. In case of deliberate misapplication, criminal action can also be taken for fraud.
However, a distinction must be drawn between transactions which are ultra vires the company and the transactions which are ultra vires the directors. Where the directors exceed their authority the same may be ratified by the general body of the shareholders. Provided the company has the capacity to do that transaction as per its memorandum of association.
(iv) Where a company’s money has been used ultra vires to acquire some property, the company’s right over such property is held secure and the company will be the right party to protect the property. This is because, though the property has been acquired for some ultra vires object, it represents the money of the company.
(v) Ultra vires borrowing does not create the relationship of creditor and debtor [In Re. Madras Native Permanent Fund Ltd., (1931) 1 Com Cases 256 (Mad.)].
This is the fifth compulsory clause which must state the amount of the capital with which the company is registered. The shares into which the capital is divided must be of fixed value, which is commonly known as the nominal value of the share. The capital is variously described as “nominal”, “authorised” or “registered”.
The amount of nominal capital is determined having regard to the present as well as future requirements of the company with reference to its objects. The usual way to state the capital in the memorandum is: “The capital of the company is Rs. 10,00,000 divided into 1,00,000 equity shares of ` 10 each”. This amount lays down the maximum limit beyond which the company cannot issue shares without altering the memorandum as provided by Section 61 of the Companies Act, 2013.
If there are both equity and preference shares, then the division of the capital is to be shown under these two heads. A company is not authorised to issue capital beyond its authorised/nominal/registered capital. If it receives applications for shares beyond the shares covered by the authorised capital, the amount received on excess number of shares should be returned.
Out of the issued capital, the total amount actually subscribed or agreed to be subscribed is known as subscribed capital, and this subscribed capital again may be wholly paid or partly paid, in which latter case the balance would be payable on future calls when made. The amount actually paid by the shareholders is called the paid-up capital.
According to Section 60 of the Act, if the amount of the authorised capital (nominal capital), of the company is stated in any notice, advertisement, official publication, business letter, bill head or letter paper, it shall also contain a statement in an equally prominent position and in equally conspicuous terms the amount of capital which has been subscribed and the amount paid-up.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.