<?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>1975 (6) TMI 39 - HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99316</link>
    <description>A composite petition seeking rectification of the register of members under section 155 and oppression and mismanagement reliefs under sections 397 and 398 may be entertained in part, but the shareholder-based reliefs are premature where membership is seriously disputed. Section 155 permits a summary rectification remedy, including incidental questions of title, while sections 397 and 398, read with section 399(1), are available only to a member complaining in that capacity. The petitioners&#039; non-resident status and absence of Reserve Bank permission under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 created a further impediment to asserting shareholder rights, reinforcing deferral of the oppression and mismanagement limb pending determination of membership.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 26 Jun 1975 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 Jan 2026 15:29:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=136368" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1975 (6) TMI 39 - HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99316</link>
      <description>A composite petition seeking rectification of the register of members under section 155 and oppression and mismanagement reliefs under sections 397 and 398 may be entertained in part, but the shareholder-based reliefs are premature where membership is seriously disputed. Section 155 permits a summary rectification remedy, including incidental questions of title, while sections 397 and 398, read with section 399(1), are available only to a member complaining in that capacity. The petitioners&#039; non-resident status and absence of Reserve Bank permission under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 created a further impediment to asserting shareholder rights, reinforcing deferral of the oppression and mismanagement limb pending determination of membership.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 Jun 1975 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99316</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>