https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97928 Minority shareholders alleging oppression must prove conduct that is unjust, harsh or tyrannical, and mere assertions of exclusion or early business irregularities are insufficient without enforceable support. On the facts, the petitioners failed to show that they had been excluded in breach of any binding arrangement or that the respondents' management of the company's affairs met the threshold for oppressive conduct. For just and equitable winding up, prior misconduct by directors, even if assumed, does not by itself justify liquidation unless additional circumstances show that winding up is desirable in the shareholders' interests. The conditions for relief under both heads were therefore not established, and the petition failed. en-us Thu, 03 Aug 1961 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 18 Jan 2012 15:52:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97928 Minority shareholders alleging oppression must prove conduct that is unjust, harsh or tyrannical, and mere assertions of exclusion or early business irregularities are insufficient without enforceable support. On the facts, the petitioners failed to show that they had been excluded in breach of any binding arrangement or that the respondents' management of the company's affairs met the threshold for oppressive conduct. For just and equitable winding up, prior misconduct by directors, even if assumed, does not by itself justify liquidation unless additional circumstances show that winding up is desirable in the shareholders' interests. The conditions for relief under both heads were therefore not established, and the petition failed. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 03 Aug 1961 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97928