Log in or register
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 14 JANUARY 2015

One Person Company - Evolution Under New Companies Act

Mansukhlal Hiralal & Company
Mansukhlal Hiralal & Company
Contributor
Mansukhlal Hiralal & Company

Mansukhlal Hiralal & Company

With a rich heritage dating back to 1910, we take immense pride in delivering exceptional legal...

View firm profile
Explore more from Mansukhlal Hiralal & Company

The new Companies Act 2013 (2013 Act) has amended favourably to suit the requirements and the dynamics of the present day economy.

IndiaCorporate/Commercial Law
Mansukhlal Hiralal & Company
Mansukhlal Hiralal & Company
Author LinkedIn connections

The new Companies Act 2013 (2013 Act) has amended favourably to suit the requirements and the dynamics of the present day economy. One such change is the One Person Company (OPC) which has been introduced as a new and refreshing concept.

This idea of OPC was propagated in 2005 by the JJ Irani Committee which had been set up for the sole purpose of incorporating necessary changes in the Companies Act, 1956 (1956 Act). They made observations regarding the changing economy and the need for giving a chance to individuals to operate in the economic domain on their own and contribute efficiently. This update is to provide you the salient features of the OPC.

Salient Features Of OPC

Definition: Section 2(62) of the 2013 Act defines OPC as a company which has only one person as a member. While under the 1956 Act, it was not possible to form a company with only one person as its member, 2013 Act provides for a new entity in the form of OPC, empowering the Central

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

Register for freeORLog in

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

See more popular content from

Article

A Sneak Peek Into A Historic Deal In The Entertainment Industry: How Paramount Beat Netflix For Warner Bros. – Lessons And Reforms For India

Chanakya, the ancient Indian strategist and author of the Arthashastra, taught that an opponent is overcome through four means: sama (persuasion), dana (inducement), bheda (division) and danda (force). The contest for Warner Bros. Discovery (WBD) is a modern illustration of all four. Netflix made the first offer and signed a merger agreement with WBD, yet Paramount played each of its cards with care.
IndiaCorporate/Commercial Law
Hammurabi & Solomon Partners
Hammurabi & Solomon Partners
Article

CCPS In India: Why Compulsorily Convertible Preference Shares Remain Central To Venture Capital And M&A Transactions

Compulsorily Convertible Preference Shares (CCPS) remain one of the most widely used instruments for venture capital and private equity investments in Indian companies. Their appeal lies in the ability to combine equity classification with negotiated economic and governance protections. But CCPS are not governed by a single, standalone statutory framework. Their legal treatment is instead shaped by the Companies Act, FEMA and foreign investment rules, tax law, and, where applicable, SEBI regulations.
IndiaCorporate/Commercial Law
King, Stubb & Kasiva
King, Stubb & Kasiva
Article

Slump Sale In India: Can Assets And Liabilities Be Left Behind Without Losing The Undertaking?

A slump sale begins with identifying the business that is to be transferred and the assets, rights and obligations that form part of it. The bargain is rarely 'take all or leave all'. The purchaser may want the operating business, but may not want an old tax dispute, an irrecoverable receivable, obsolete equipment, excess land or legacy financing. This choice is commercially ordinary, but it can make slump sale classification more difficult.
IndiaCorporate/Commercial Law
Corporate Professionals - Advisors & Advocates
Corporate Professionals - Advisors & Advocates
Article

FCRA Amendment Rules, 2026: Key Changes And Practical Implications

AZB & Partners provides important disclaimers regarding the nature and purpose of their website, clarifying that no solicitation or advertising has occurred and that the information is provided solely at the user's request. The firm outlines the limitations of the website content and emphasizes that accessing it does not create a lawyer-client relationship. Users are informed about their responsibilities when using the site and the firm's intellectual property rights over the content.
IndiaCorporate/Commercial Law
AZB & Partners
AZB & Partners
Article

The Insolvency And Bankruptcy Code (Amendment) Act, 2026

India's Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code undergoes significant reform through the 2026 Amendment Act, introducing stricter timelines, enhanced creditor oversight, and frameworks for group and cross-border insolvency. The amendments address persistent challenges in resolution efficiency, withdrawal restrictions, and fraudulent transaction scrutiny while aligning with international best practices to strengthen investor confidence.
IndiaInsolvency/Bankruptcy/Re-Structuring
Mansukhlal Hiralal & Company
Mansukhlal Hiralal & Company
Article

Litigation Update | Supreme Court Upholds Occupants' Rights In Redevelopment Projects, Reinstates Mhada Orders For Permanent Alternate Accommodation

The Supreme Court of India has delivered a landmark ruling in a redevelopment dispute, firmly establishing that Permanent Alternate Accommodation Agreements executed under the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Act are statutory instruments, not mere private contracts. This decision addresses critical questions about developer obligations, occupant rights, and regulatory authority when redevelopment projects fail to honor commitments made to original tenants.
IndiaReal Estate and Construction
Mansukhlal Hiralal & Company
Mansukhlal Hiralal & Company
Article

Supreme Court Clarifies Inheritance Rights Where Property Is Jointly Held In The Names Of Two Widows Under The Indian Succession Act, 1925

The Supreme Court has clarified how property registered in the joint names of two wives of a common husband should be treated for succession purposes under the Indian Succession Act, 1925. In a case involving a 1959 property purchase where the husband provided consideration but registered the land in his two wives' names, the Court held that the property vested in the wives themselves, not the husband. The judgment demonstrates how Sections 33, 35 and 38 of the Act must be applied sequentially and separatel
IndiaFamily and Matrimonial
Mansukhlal Hiralal & Company
Mansukhlal Hiralal & Company