Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :
        Companies Law

        2001 (3) TMI 926 - HC - Companies Law

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Court permits challenge to valuation report, vacates orders, gives directions based on compromise agreement. The court allowed the challenge to the valuation report to proceed, vacated the interim orders, and provided directions for the continuation of the case ...
                        Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
                          Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.

                              Court permits challenge to valuation report, vacates orders, gives directions based on compromise agreement.

                              The court allowed the challenge to the valuation report to proceed, vacated the interim orders, and provided directions for the continuation of the case based on the compromise agreement and the petitioner's entitlement to the correct value of his shares.




                              Issues Involved:

                              1. Shareholding and management dispute.
                              2. Validity of resignation and withdrawal of resignation.
                              3. Allegations of interference in management.
                              4. Agreement for share transfer and valuation.
                              5. Challenge to the valuation report.
                              6. Maintainability of the challenge to the valuation report.
                              7. Interim orders and their continuation.

                              Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

                              1. Shareholding and Management Dispute:
                              The petitioner, a shareholder and former Managing Director of the Indian company, alleged that the second and third respondents, also shareholders, were attempting to oust him from the company. The company, involved in data communication products, had its share capital divided among the petitioner, the second respondent (operating a related foreign company), and the third respondent and his family members. The petitioner claimed that the respondents were interfering with the company's management and sought relief through a company petition.

                              2. Validity of Resignation and Withdrawal of Resignation:
                              The petitioner resigned as Managing Director effective 31-3-1994 but withdrew his resignation on 17-3-1994. The respondents, however, contended that the resignation had already come into effect and remained valid. The petitioner argued that the respondents wrongfully accepted his resignation and appointed a new director, contrary to the agreement.

                              3. Allegations of Interference in Management:
                              The petitioner alleged that the second respondent and his relatives passed resolutions to reduce his emoluments and entitlement to profit shares, violating the agreement. He claimed that the respondents were not allowing him to inspect the company's books and were bent on ousting him from the company.

                              4. Agreement for Share Transfer and Valuation:
                              The parties reached a compromise, agreeing that the petitioner would transfer his 33.33% shareholding to the respondents in exchange for the share value determined by a valuer. The terms of the compromise included the appointment of M/s. Arthur Anderson & Co. as the valuer and detailed the process for valuation and settlement of the petitioner's shares.

                              5. Challenge to the Valuation Report:
                              The petitioner challenged the valuation report by Coopers & Lybrand P. Ltd., which valued his stake at Rs. 11,39,400. The respondents accepted the valuation despite claiming the petitioner had mismanaged the company. The petitioner argued that the valuation was based on erroneous principles and sought to set it aside.

                              6. Maintainability of the Challenge to the Valuation Report:
                              The court examined whether the valuation report could be challenged. The respondents argued that the valuer's report was binding and could not be attacked in the proceedings. The court, however, held that the valuation could be challenged if it was erroneous, as the valuer acted as an expert and not as an arbitrator. The court noted that an expert's determination could be questioned if it was shown to be wrong on facts or law.

                              7. Interim Orders and Their Continuation:
                              The court considered whether to continue the interim orders dated 30-1-1995 and 8-8-1996. It found no justification for continuing the orders as the compromise had been largely acted upon. The petitioner had filed share scrips and signed blank transfer forms, and the respondents had deposited Rs. 10 lakhs. The court vacated the interim orders, subject to the respondents taking out an FDR of Rs. 15 lakhs in the name of the Registrar of the court.

                              In conclusion, the court allowed the challenge to the valuation report to proceed, vacated the interim orders, and provided directions for the continuation of the case based on the compromise agreement and the petitioner's entitlement to the correct value of his shares.
                              Full Summary is available for active users!
                              Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                              Topics

                              ActsIncome Tax
                              No Records Found