Oppression and Mismanagement - The Appellants are Shareholders ...

Case Laws Companies Law

December 28, 2023

Oppression and Mismanagement - The Appellants are Shareholders of the Respondent No. 1 Company and are family members of the other Shareholders. They are concerned with the affairs of the Company and their arraignment as party to the proceedings would facilitate an effective, efficacious, just and fair adjudication of the case. It is held that they are proper and necessary party and their impleadment will assist in arriving at the correct decision pending with NCLT. - AT

View Source

← Previous Next →

Oppression and Mismanagement - The Appellants are Shareholders ...

Case Laws Companies Law

December 28, 2023

You may also like:

Oppression and mismanagement - removal of the Petitioner from the Directorship - the instant Company Petition is maintainable U/s.241 of the Companies Act, 2013, and the...

Oppression and Mismanagement - minority shareholders - There was no alternative except liquidation or revival of company through other modes including sale of assets to...

This case pertains to a prayer for rectification in the Register of Members concerning the transfer of shares, invoking Section 154 of the NCLT Rules. The key points...

Oppression and mismanagement - Determination of minimum shareholding for filing complain / petition against the company - The ‘onus’, to establish ‘Membership’ is on the...

Oppression and mismanagement - member - When the Respondent No.1 being a shareholder with 25% shareholding at the time of incorporation and also being one of the...

Oppression and mismanagement - Merely because the Petitioner/Applicant is a majority shareholder in the Respondent No. 1, it is not entitled or authorised to file the...

Mintainability of a company petition u/s 399 of the Companies Act, 1956, focusing on the pre-conditions envisaged under sub-sections (1) and (3). It examines whether the...

The petition alleges oppression and mismanagement by the company's majority shareholders against the petitioners, who were removed as directors through an Extraordinary...

Oppression and mismanagement - appellant has no inherent right to continue as Managing Director/Director in the 1st respondent unless he is able to carry the majority...

The NCLAT upheld the NCLT's decision to refuse waiver u/ss 244(1)(a) and (b) of the Companies Act 2013 to the Appellants, who held only 5.83% shareholding, to file an...

Winding up order - The Company was non-functional, it had already given its premises on rent and it was the only income of the Company. Therefore, we find that the...

The Appellate Tribunal found the Appellant Company guilty of contravening u/s 9(1)(a) of FERA 1973 by making payments to a person outside India without RBI permission....

Validity of allotment of shares to majority shareholders of private limited company - The stand of the Company is that since it is a family Company and the decisions are...

Oppression and mismanagement - It is admitted fact that the major portion of the equity shares (2/3rd) are held by the 1st and 3rd petitioners and the 2nd Respondent...

Oppression and mismanagement - misappropriation of funds - as such no irregularities were found in convening an Extra-Ordinary General Meeting which was requisitioned at...

Quick Updates: