https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98613 The court held that shareholders do not have the locus standi to apply under Order 21, Rule 90, CPC, to set aside the sale of the company's property. Shareholders were deemed to lack a direct and immediate interest in the company's assets, as their rights are contingent on the surplus assets after debts and liabilities are settled. The court emphasized the separate legal entity status of the company from its shareholders and cited relevant case law to support its decision. The appeal was dismissed based on these findings. en-us Tue, 03 Dec 1968 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 21 Jan 2012 13:02:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98613 The court held that shareholders do not have the locus standi to apply under Order 21, Rule 90, CPC, to set aside the sale of the company's property. Shareholders were deemed to lack a direct and immediate interest in the company's assets, as their rights are contingent on the surplus assets after debts and liabilities are settled. The court emphasized the separate legal entity status of the company from its shareholders and cited relevant case law to support its decision. The appeal was dismissed based on these findings. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 03 Dec 1968 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98613