<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1964 (2) TMI 31 - HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98088</link>
    <description>Sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act, 1956 provide preventive remedies to end or prevent continuing oppression or prejudicial management; they do not generally permit completed third-party transactions to be undone unless the Act expressly provides otherwise. Oppression requires proved unfair domination, lack of probity or conduct prejudicial to the company, rather than business decisions justified by financial distress, losses, uneconomic operations or a fair sale price. Section 173 requires disclosure of material facts in the explanatory statement so shareholders can make an informed judgment. A purchaser may also rely on the doctrine of indoor management where no timely notice of alleged irregularity is received.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 18 Feb 1964 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 24 Jun 2015 16:13:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=135145" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1964 (2) TMI 31 - HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98088</link>
      <description>Sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act, 1956 provide preventive remedies to end or prevent continuing oppression or prejudicial management; they do not generally permit completed third-party transactions to be undone unless the Act expressly provides otherwise. Oppression requires proved unfair domination, lack of probity or conduct prejudicial to the company, rather than business decisions justified by financial distress, losses, uneconomic operations or a fair sale price. Section 173 requires disclosure of material facts in the explanatory statement so shareholders can make an informed judgment. A purchaser may also rely on the doctrine of indoor management where no timely notice of alleged irregularity is received.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 18 Feb 1964 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98088</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>