https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97321 A shareholder cannot, in his own name, seek to set aside a court sale of company property under Order XXI, Rule 90 CPC merely by alleging fraud, collusion, or mismanagement in the company's affairs. The property belongs to the company as a separate legal person, so a shareholder's interest in its fortunes does not create direct locus standi to challenge the sale as if the property were personally his. Where the grievance is that the company is being managed prejudicially, oppressively, or in fraud of the company, the proper course is to invoke the statutory remedy under section 153-C of the Indian Companies Act on behalf of the company. en-us Fri, 10 Dec 1954 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 16 Jan 2012 12:46:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97321 A shareholder cannot, in his own name, seek to set aside a court sale of company property under Order XXI, Rule 90 CPC merely by alleging fraud, collusion, or mismanagement in the company's affairs. The property belongs to the company as a separate legal person, so a shareholder's interest in its fortunes does not create direct locus standi to challenge the sale as if the property were personally his. Where the grievance is that the company is being managed prejudicially, oppressively, or in fraud of the company, the proper course is to invoke the statutory remedy under section 153-C of the Indian Companies Act on behalf of the company. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 10 Dec 1954 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97321