BHAVIN RASHMI MEHTA v CHETAN MEHTA & 3 Ors

Q: Which legislation does [2023] SGHC(A) 19 consider?

The judgment refers to Companies Act (Cap 50) and Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Cap 322). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.

[2023] SGHC(A) 19 High Court (Appellate Division) 15 May 2023 AD/CA 49/2022 21 min read

14 cases cited (8 SG, 6 foreign)

Outcome

Appeal dismissed

we dismissed the appeal on the facts.

Source: [2023] SGHC(A) 19, High Court (Appellate Division), decided 15 May 2023. Read directly from the judgment.

Key facts

Court	High Court (Appellate Division)
Decided	15 May 2023
Judges	Kannan Ramesh, Quentin Loh Sze-On, Woo Bih Li
Charges / claim	Companies
Outcome	Appeal dismissed
Counsel	Selvam LLC, WongPartnership LLP, Ang Shunli Alanna, Jerald Foo, Koh Swee Yen, Luis Inaki Duhart Gonzalez, Suegene Uy, Teo Wei Kiat Samuel

Source: [2023] SGHC(A) 19, High Court (Appellate Division), decided 15 May 2023 — eLitigation. Updated 10 July 2026.

Catchwords

Companies — Directors — Resignation

Practice Areas

Companies

Judges (3)

Kannan Ramesh Coram Quentin Loh Sze-On Coram Woo Bih Li Delivered

Counsel (8)

Selvam LLC Firm WongPartnership LLP Firm Ang Shunli Alanna Counsel Respondent Jerald Foo Counsel Appellant Koh Swee Yen Counsel Respondent Luis Inaki Duhart Gonzalez Counsel Appellant Suegene Uy Counsel Respondent Teo Wei Kiat Samuel Counsel Respondent

Parties (5)

Arpee Gem Pte Ltd Respondent Bhavin Rashmi Mehta Appellant Chetan Mehta Respondent Quek Hung Guan Respondent Sanjiwan Sahni Respondent

Case Significance

Bhavin Rashmi Mehta v Chetan Mehta and others [2023] SGHC(A) 19 is the grounds of decision of the Appellate Division of the High Court, delivered on 15 May 2023 by Woo Bih Li JAD (sitting with Kannan Ramesh JAD and Quentin Loh Sze-On SJ) in Civil Appeal No 49 of 2022. The appeal, brought by Bhavin Rashmi Mehta against Chetan Mehta, Sanjiwan Sahni, Quek Hung Guan and Arpee Gem Pte Ltd, centred on whether one of the respondents had withdrawn his resignation from his directorship of Arpee Gem, which in turn affected whether he could validly vote on resolutions passed by the company's board. The court dismissed the appeal on 27 April 2023.

[2023] SGHC(A) 19 explained

BHAVIN RASHMI MEHTA v CHETAN MEHTA & 3 Ors ([2023] SGHC(A) 19) is a Singapore judgment decided by the High Court (Appellate Division) on 15 May 2023. It is categorised under Companies. It is a recent decision; within this corpus no later judgment has cited it yet. This page summarises what the reported decision covers and links the primary sources — the full judgment, the statutes it cites, and the other cases it engages with — so the decision can be read in context. It is reference information, not legal advice, and it does not state the outcome or any holding beyond what the official judgment records.

What is [2023] SGHC(A) 19 about?

BHAVIN RASHMI MEHTA v CHETAN MEHTA & 3 Ors ([2023] SGHC(A) 19) is a High Court (Appellate Division) decision from 2023. Its published catchwords are “Companies — Directors — Resignation”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.

Which legislation does [2023] SGHC(A) 19 consider?

The judgment refers to Companies Act (Cap 50) and Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Cap 322). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.

What did the court decide in Bhavin Rashmi Mehta v Chetan Mehta and others [2023] SGHC(A) 19?

The Appellate Division of the High Court, with Woo Bih Li JAD delivering the grounds, dismissed Bhavin Rashmi Mehta's Civil Appeal No 49 of 2022 on 27 April 2023, issuing its grounds of decision on 15 May 2023.

What was the central issue in [2023] SGHC(A) 19?

The appeal turned on whether one of the respondents had withdrawn his resignation from his directorship of Arpee Gem Pte Ltd, which in turn affected whether he could validly vote on resolutions passed by the company's board.