https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97592 Where a parent diverted business to its own operations and its nominee directors failed to protect the subsidiary, the subsidiary's affairs were conducted oppressively to minority shareholders; the court treated both positive diversion by the parent and omissions by nominee directors as conduct of the company amounting to oppression, and so found for the petitioners. As to remedy, the court held that section 210 permits equitable relief requiring the majority to purchase the minority shares to end the oppression; the appropriate valuation is the company's value absent the oppressive conduct, and the buy out order was upheld as a lawful exercise of discretion. en-us Thu, 24 Jul 1958 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 17 Jan 2012 13:17:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97592 Where a parent diverted business to its own operations and its nominee directors failed to protect the subsidiary, the subsidiary's affairs were conducted oppressively to minority shareholders; the court treated both positive diversion by the parent and omissions by nominee directors as conduct of the company amounting to oppression, and so found for the petitioners. As to remedy, the court held that section 210 permits equitable relief requiring the majority to purchase the minority shares to end the oppression; the appropriate valuation is the company's value absent the oppressive conduct, and the buy out order was upheld as a lawful exercise of discretion. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 24 Jul 1958 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97592