Source: https://finapp.co.in/company-promoter/
Timestamp: 2019-04-19 18:29:04+00:00

Document:
The Following article deals with the Promoter Definition, Promoter Duties,Promoter Legal Provisions and related Case laws. Also Read our earlier posts on Public Company India, Private Company and One Person Company (OPC). For more Information About Companies Act 2013 Click here. The promoter has been defined as a person or persons who are in over-all control of the company, who are instrumental in the formulation of a plan or programme pursuant to which the securities are offered to the public and those named in the prospectus as promoters.
in accordance with whose advice, directions or instructions the Board of Directors of the company is accustomed to act.
Provided that sub-clause (c) shall not apply to a person who is acting merely in a professional capacity.
By virtue of above definition, persons in accordance with whose advice, directions or instructions the Board of Directors of the company is accustomed to act are also treated as promoters. However, if a person is merely acting in a professional capacity i.e. giving only professional advice to the Board of directors, he shall not be treated as a promoter.
the person or persons named in the offer document as promoters.
Is a director/officer/employee of the issuer a promoter?
A director/officer/employee who has control over the affairs of the company, directly or indirectly whether as a shareholder, director or otherwise is considered as a promoter. As per section 2 (27), control” shall include the right to appoint majority of the directors or to control the management or policy decisions exercisable by a person or persons acting individually or in concert, directly or indirectly, including by virtue of their shareholding or management rights or shareholders agreements or voting agreements or in any other manner.
However, a director or officer or employee of the issuer or a person, if acting as such merely in his professional capacity, shall not be deemed as a promoter.
In Whaley Bridge Calico Printing Co. v. Green (1880) 5 Q.B.D. 109, Bowen, L.J. held that the term “promoter” is a term not of law but of business usually summing up in a single word a number of business operations familiar to the commercial world by which a company is generally brought into existence”.
But a person may be a promoter even if he has undertaken a lesser active role in the formation of a company. Any person who becomes a director, places shares or negotiates preliminary agreements, may be covered by this term. Who constitutes a promoter in a particular case , has to be seen in the light of a clear legislative definition provided under section 2(69) the Companies Act, 2013. A company may have several promoters. A promoter may be a natural person or a company.
It is clear from the foregoing that the word “promoter” is used in common parlance to denote any individual, corporate, syndicate, association or partnership which has taken all the necessary steps to create and mould a company and set it going.
The promoter originates the scheme for the formation of a company; gets together the subscribers to the memorandum, gets the Memorandum and Articles prepared, executed and registered, finds the bankers, brokers and legal advisers, finds the first directors, settles the terms of preliminary contracts with vendors and agreement with underwriters, and makes arrangement for preparation, advertisement and circulation of the prospectus and placement of the capital.
But a person who merely acts in a professional capacity on behalf of the promoter, such as a solicitor who draws up an agreement or articles, an accountant or valuer who prepares figures or valuation on behalf of a promoter, and who is paid for the same, is not a promoter.
While the accurate description of a promoter may be difficult, his legal position is quite clear. A promoter is neither an agent of, nor a trustee for, the company because it is not in existence. But he occupies a fiduciary position in relation to the company and therefore requires to make full disclosure of the relevant facts, including any profit made by him as held by Lord Cairns in Erlanger v. New Sombrero Phosphate Co. (39 LT 269).
“Although not an agent for the company, nor a trustee for it before its formation, the old familiar principles of law of agency and of trusteeship have been extended and very properly extended to meet such cases. It is well settled that a promoter of a company is accountable to it for all money secretly obtained by him from it just as the relationship of the principal and agent or the trustee and cestui que trust had really existed between him and the company when the money was obtained”.
Similarly, it was observed in Lagunas Nitrate Co. v. Lagunas Syndicate, (1899) 2 Ch. 392 that “promoters” stand in a fiduciary relation to the company they promote and to those persons whom they induce to become shareholders in it”.
The promoters undoubtedly stand in a fiduciary position. They have in their hands the creation and moulding of the company. They have the power of defining how and when and in what shape and under whose supervision it shall come into existence and begin to act [As per Lord Cairns in Erlanger v. New Sombrero Phosphate Co., (1873) 3 App. Case 1218-1236].
In a series of similar cases under the English Law it has been held that the promoters, being in a fiduciary position, may not make, either directly or indirectly, any profit at the expense of the company and that if he does make a profit in disregard of this rule, the company can compel him to account for it.
The promoters can be compelled to surrender the secret profits [Emma Silver Mining Co. v. Grant, (1879) 11 Ch. D. and Erlanger v. New Sombrero Phosphate Co, (supra)].
(a) As per section 102(4), where as a result of the non-disclosure or insufficient disclosure in any explanatory statement annexed to the notice of a general meeting , by a promoter, director, manager, if any, or other key managerial personnel, any benefit accrues to such promoter, director, manager or other key managerial personnel or their relatives, either directly or indirectly, the promoter, director, manager or other key managerial personnel, as the case may be, shall hold such benefit in trust for the company, and shall, without prejudice to any other action being taken against him under this Act or under any other law for the time being in force, be liable to compensate the company to the extent of the benefit received by him.
The above provision is based on the principle that a promoter cannot make either directly or indirectly, any profit at the expense of the company he promotes, without the knowledge and consent of the company and that if he does so, in disregard of this rule, the company can compel him to account for it. In relation to disclosure it may be noted that part disclosure will also attract the same consequences.
A promoter is not forbidden to make profit but he is barred from making any secret profit. He may make a profit out of promotion with the consent of the company in the same way as an agent may retain a profit obtained through his agency with his principal’s consent.
In Gluckstein v. Barnes, (1900) A.C. 240 it was held that where a promoter makes some profits in connection with a transaction to which company is a party and does not make full disclosure of his profits; the company has the right to affirm the contracts and promoter should handover his profits to the company.
(b) A promoter is not allowed to derive a profit from the sale of his own property to the company unless all material facts are disclosed. If a promoter contracts to sell his own property to the company without making a full disclosure, the company may either repudiate the sale or affirm the contract and recover the profit made out of it by the promoter. Either way the dishonest promoter is deprived of his advantage.
In Erlanger v. New Sombrero Phosphate Co., (1878) 3 A.C. 1218, a syndicate of which E was the head purchased an island containing mines of phosphate for £ 5,000. E then formed a company to buy this island. A contract was made between X a nominee of the syndicate and the company for its purchase at £ 1,10,000. The details of the sale were not disclosed to the shareholders or to the independent Board of directors. The company now sought to rescind the contract of sale. It was held that as there had been no disclosure by the promoters of the profit they were making, the company was entitled to rescind the contract.
In addition to disclosing secret profits, a promoter has the duty to disclose to the company any interest he has in a transaction entered into by him.
(c) As per section 13(8), a company, which has raised money from public through prospectus and still has any unutilised amount out of the money so raised, shall not change its objects for which it raised the money through prospectus unless a special resolution is passed by the company and the dissenting shareholders shall be given an opportunity to exit by the promoters and shareholders having control in accordance with regulations to be specified by the Securities and Exchange Board.
(d) As per section 27(2), the dissenting shareholders being those shareholders who have not agreed to the proposal to vary the terms of contracts or objects referred to in the prospectus, shall be given an exit offer by promoters or controlling shareholders at such exit price, and in such manner and conditions as may be specified by the Securities and Exchange Board by making regulations in this behalf.
(e) As per section 167(3), where all the directors of a company vacate their offices under any of the disqualifications specified in sub-section (1), the promoter or, in his absence, the Central Government shall appoint the required number of directors who shall hold office till the directors are appointed by the company in the general meeting.
(f) As per section 168(3), where all the directors of a company resign from their offices, or vacate their offices under section 167, the promoter or, in his absence, the Central Government shall appoint the required number of directors who shall hold office till the directors are appointed by the company in general meeting.
(g) As per section 284(1)* , the promoters, directors, officers and employees, who are or have been in employment of the company or acting or associated with the company shall extend full cooperation to the Company Liquidator in discharge of his functions and duties during winding up by the Tribunal.
Promoters’ duties cannot depend on a contract because at the time the promotion begins, the company is not incorporated, and so cannot contract with its promoters.
The promoter’s duties must be the same as that of a person acting on behalf of another individual without a contract of employment. If he does make any misrepresentation in a prospectus he may be held guilty of fraud under Section 17 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 and would be held liable for damages.
It is a general opinion that a promoter completes his duty the moment the company, that he promotes, is incorporated or when the Board of directors is appointed. But, in reality it continues until the company has acquired the property for which it was formed to manage and has raised its initial share capital, [Lagunas Nitrate Co. v. Lagunas Syndicate Ltd. (Supra)] and the Board takes over the management of the affairs of the company from the promoters.
1.0.1 Is a director/officer/employee of the issuer a promoter?

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