Oppression and mismanagement - member - When the Respondent No.1 ...

Companies Law

June 4, 2019

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 founding Directors of the Company is admitted, it cannot be contended that he ceased to be a “member” upon reduction of his share capital and that too when the transfer of shareholding is alleged to be clandestine and product of fabrication and forgery

View Source

← Previous Next →

Oppression and mismanagement - member - When the Respondent No.1 ...

Companies Law

June 4, 2019

You may also like:

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...

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 - The Appellants are Shareholders of the Respondent No. 1 Company and are family members of the other Shareholders. They are concerned with...

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 - removal of minority directors - the second respondent, though holding 70 per cent. of shareholding, cannot act arbitrary against the...

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

Oppression and Mismanagement - bogus transactions - siphoning of funds - The allegation is an isolated incident and in order to invoke provisions of Oppression and...

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

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...

There are certain oppression and mismanagement. The relationship between the Majority Shareholders & Minority Shareholders are strained. Hence, there is a need for...

Oppression and mismanagement - Directors were under a responsibility to disclose to all the shareholders that further shares are to be issued and such of them as were...

Oppression and mismanagement - Removal of Director - Period of limitation - Time gap of 5 years - The petition filed by the petitioner is prima facie barred by...

Oppression and Mismanagement - the impugned order is a nonspeaking order. The question of Oppression, and Mismanagement, Maintainability and Limitation in the present...

Resolution professional doesn’t require nod of shareholders/members for insolvency resolution

Oppression and mismanagement - Transfer of shares - Once it is accepted that the Appellant can also challenge the transfer of shareholding as being oppressive and as...

Quick Updates: