https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98197 In a quasi-partnership company treated in substance as a partnership, equal financial interests and equal voting power meant that partnership principles governed the just and equitable winding-up question, and exclusion from working management with breakdown of mutual confidence justified a winding-up order. Relief for oppression under section 210 required oppressive conduct towards the petitioner in his capacity as a shareholder; loss of office, reduced remuneration, or non-payment of dividends did not by themselves amount to oppression, and the complaints did not show lack of probity or fair dealing. The oppression claim therefore failed. en-us Wed, 19 May 1965 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 19 Jan 2012 16:01:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98197 In a quasi-partnership company treated in substance as a partnership, equal financial interests and equal voting power meant that partnership principles governed the just and equitable winding-up question, and exclusion from working management with breakdown of mutual confidence justified a winding-up order. Relief for oppression under section 210 required oppressive conduct towards the petitioner in his capacity as a shareholder; loss of office, reduced remuneration, or non-payment of dividends did not by themselves amount to oppression, and the complaints did not show lack of probity or fair dealing. The oppression claim therefore failed. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 19 May 1965 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98197