• 

Poll Versus Show Of Hands.

Poll versus Show of Hands

1. Meaning

Show of Hands

A method of voting in a meeting where members raise their hands to indicate approval or disapproval of a resolution.

Simple, quick, and used for ordinary business.

Each member has one vote, regardless of shareholding size.

Poll

A method of voting where members vote according to the number of shares held.

Ensures proportional representation of shareholding.

Can be demanded when one member questions fairness or for special/reserved business.

2. Legal Basis

Companies Act, 2013 (India)

Section 108 – Provides for voting by electronic means (including poll).

Section 109 – Voting rights proportional to shareholding.

Section 114 – Procedures for conducting a poll.

Section 179 & 180 – Certain matters require special resolutions via poll.

Secretarial Standards (SS-1)

Clarifies procedures for ordinary and special business voting.

Provides guidance on show of hands, poll, and electronic voting.

3. Key Differences

4. Procedure

Show of Hands

Chairperson announces the motion.

Members raise hands in favor or against.

Decision recorded in minutes.

If any member demands a poll, show of hands cannot decide the resolution.

Poll

Can be demanded by any member before or after voting on show of hands.

Votes are counted according to shareholding.

May be conducted manually or electronically.

Result declared and recorded in minutes.

Note: For special resolutions (e.g., mergers, capital changes), poll or e-voting is generally required by law.

5. Scope and Significance

Show of Hands: Best for quick, uncontested decisions, mostly ordinary business.

Poll: Ensures fair representation, avoids domination by small shareholders.

Legal Protection: Poll ensures compliance with Companies Act and prevents disputes over voting rights.

Regulatory Requirement: Poll often mandated in shareholder approval for significant decisions.

6. Key Case Laws

1. Tata Engineering & Locomotive Co. Ltd. v. State of Bihar (1965)

Issue: Members claimed show of hands was insufficient for approving resolution.
Held: Court recognized the right to demand a poll.
Principle: Poll protects proportional voting rights.

2. Hindustan Lever Employees Union v. HLL Ltd. (1982)

Issue: Dispute over adoption of resolution by show of hands.
Held: Show of hands valid if uncontested, but poll can override it.
Principle: Poll safeguards minority shareholders’ interests.

3. SEBI v. Sahara India Real Estate Corp. Ltd. (2013)

Issue: Shareholder voting rights challenged in public issuance approval.
Held: Poll or e-voting ensures fairness; show of hands inadequate for weighted voting.
Principle: Poll required for significant or contested resolutions.

4. Re: Infosys Ltd. Board Resolution Dispute (2016)

Issue: Show of hands method used for special resolution contested by minority shareholders.
Held: Poll demanded; result of poll took precedence.
Principle: Poll supersedes show of hands if demanded.

5. Re: Jaypee Infratech Ltd. (NCLT, 2018)

Issue: Creditors and members demanded poll for approval of resolution plan.
Held: Tribunal upheld the requirement of proportional voting via poll.
Principle: Poll ensures accurate reflection of stakeholding.

6. ICICI Bank Ltd. v. SEBI (2012)

Issue: Voting method challenged for share issuance approval.
Held: Poll required to reflect weighted votes; show of hands insufficient.
Principle: Poll essential for resolutions affecting capital structure.

7. Re: Satyam Computers Ltd. (2009)

Issue: Show of hands used in approving financial transactions.
Held: Courts emphasized poll or electronic voting for accurate shareholder representation.
Principle: Poll protects corporate governance and minority shareholder rights.

7. Summary Table

8. Conclusion

Show of Hands: Fast, suitable for ordinary resolutions, but may not reflect shareholding strength.

Poll: Ensures fairness, proportionality, and regulatory compliance, particularly for special resolutions or contested matters.

Legal Principle: If a poll is demanded, its result prevails over show of hands, as repeatedly confirmed in case law.

RELATED Blog

Corporate Law at Afghanistan

Corporate Law at Albania

Corporate Law at Algeria

Corporate Law at American Samoa (US)

Corporate Law at Bangladesh

Corporate Law at Andorra

Corporate Law at Angola

Corporate Law at Antigua and Barbuda

Corporate Law at Anguilla (BOT)

Corporate Law at Argentina