https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97581 The court held that the plaintiff was not entitled to a "legal character" as a managing director under Section 42 of the Specific Relief Act. The board of directors had the power to revoke the plaintiff's appointment, and the plaintiff could not rely on the company's articles of association. Consequently, the resolutions were not ultra vires, and the plaintiff was not entitled to the declarations and injunctions sought. The court dismissed the suit and ordered the plaintiff to pay costs to the first defendant company and defendants Nos. 2 to 6. en-us Mon, 06 Jan 1958 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 17 Jan 2012 13:02:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97581 The court held that the plaintiff was not entitled to a "legal character" as a managing director under Section 42 of the Specific Relief Act. The board of directors had the power to revoke the plaintiff's appointment, and the plaintiff could not rely on the company's articles of association. Consequently, the resolutions were not ultra vires, and the plaintiff was not entitled to the declarations and injunctions sought. The court dismissed the suit and ordered the plaintiff to pay costs to the first defendant company and defendants Nos. 2 to 6. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 06 Jan 1958 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97581