Aequs Limited’s proposed merger with three wholly-owned subsidiaries has been rejected by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs due to non-compliance with Section 233 of the Companies Act. The company failed to reach the required 90% shareholder approval threshold and did not secure necessary NOCs from stock exchanges. Management is now evaluating whether to refile the application or pursue a different legal route for the restructuring.
Aequs Limited Amalgamation Scheme Rejected by MCA
Ministry of Corporate Affairs rejects merger involving three subsidiaries; Aequs reports no material impact on core operations.
Reader Takeaway: Regulatory rejection stems from procedural gaps; management weighs re-filing or alternate legal routes for internal restructuring.
What just happened
The Office of the Regional Director (Ministry of Corporate Affairs) issued an order on October 12, 2026, rejecting the scheme of amalgamation between Aequs Limited and its three wholly-owned subsidiaries: AeroStructures Manufacturing India Private Limited, Aequs Engineered Plastics Private Limited, and Aequs Force Consumer Products Private Limited.
Why this matters
The rejection highlights significant procedural non-compliance under Section 233 of the Companies Act, 2013. The company fell short of the mandatory 90% share value approval threshold, reporting only 88.9%. Furthermore, the company failed to provide proof of document delivery to all shareholders and did not submit the required No-Objection Certificates (NOC) from BSE and NSE. The presence of seven pending labour court cases against one of the transferor companies also factored into the regulatory decision.
Next steps
Management has stated that the proposed merger was an internal restructuring process and does not impact business operations. The company is currently reviewing the order and may either refile under Section 233 after ensuring full compliance or pursue approval through the Section 232 route under the Companies Act.
Risks to watch
Investors should monitor the potential for delayed restructuring timelines as the company navigates the legal requirements. The shift to a Section 232 process would likely involve increased regulatory scrutiny and a longer approval window compared to the fast-track route.