1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New: Section-Wise Filter ✕
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>Petition Dismissed Under Section 399, Application Infructuous. Parties Can Still Negotiate Share Purchase.</h1> The petition was dismissed as not maintainable under section 399, leading to the related application becoming infructuous. The respondents were not ... - Issues involved: Alleged reduction in percentage shareholding, maintainability of the petition u/s 399.Alleged reduction in percentage shareholding: The petitioner, holding 100 shares in M/s. Seth Hotels Private Limited, claimed his 20% shareholding had decreased significantly due to further share allotments. The company, incorporated in 1993, had increased its paid-up capital from Rs. 5,000 to over Rs. 1.79 crores through multiple allotments excluding the petitioner and another brother. The petitioner sought cancellation of the impugned shares and requested to tag his petition with another shareholder's petition. The respondents challenged the maintainability of the petition u/s 399, arguing the petitioner did not hold 10% shares or constitute 1/10th of the membership due to 15 shareholders in the company.Maintainability of the petition u/s 399: The respondents contended that apart from one brother, none of the other siblings showed interest in the company, and shares were allotted without objection. They highlighted that all shareholders except the petitioner had transferred their shares to the 16th/17th respondent group, which invested over Rs. 6 crores to manage the company and settle a lawsuit. The respondents emphasized that relevant returns were filed for all share allotments, and the petitioner was aware of these transactions. The petitioner's delay in filing the petition, despite knowing about the allotments in 2006, was noted, leading to the dismissal of the petition for being not maintainable u/s 399.Conclusion: The petition was dismissed as not maintainable u/s 399, rendering the related application infructuous. The dismissal did not prevent the respondents from negotiating to purchase the petitioner's shares.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
