https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97574 The article clarifies that where it is 'impracticable' to call or conduct a company meeting in the prescribed manner, the court has power to direct that a meeting be held even if some shareholders oppose the application; 'impracticable' is narrower than 'impossible' and requires a practical assessment. Judicial discretion under this power must consider whether refusal would deprive a member of statutory rights and whether directors are neglecting duties such as convening an AGM. Operatively, the court may order a meeting with adjusted procedural terms (for example a reduced quorum and specified venue) to enable exercise of statutory removal rights. en-us Wed, 02 Jul 1958 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 17 Jan 2012 12:48:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97574 The article clarifies that where it is 'impracticable' to call or conduct a company meeting in the prescribed manner, the court has power to direct that a meeting be held even if some shareholders oppose the application; 'impracticable' is narrower than 'impossible' and requires a practical assessment. Judicial discretion under this power must consider whether refusal would deprive a member of statutory rights and whether directors are neglecting duties such as convening an AGM. Operatively, the court may order a meeting with adjusted procedural terms (for example a reduced quorum and specified venue) to enable exercise of statutory removal rights. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 02 Jul 1958 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97574