<?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>1985 (8) TMI 296 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101295</link>
    <description>Informal family understandings cannot override statutory shareholder rights or articles of association unless proved, legally enforceable and consistent with company law. Shareholders may enforce individual rights, but courts ordinarily do not intervene in internal management decisions made within corporate powers unless ultra vires conduct, fraud or another recognised exception is established. Oppression requires continuous, burdensome, harsh and wrongful conduct affecting membership rights; exclusion from management alone is insufficient. Relief for mismanagement or winding up on just and equitable grounds requires evidence of circumstances such as loss of substratum, business impossibility, deadlock or lack of probity. Bona fide commercial share allotments and properly authorised resolutions do not become oppressive merely because they alter management participation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 02 Aug 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 04 Aug 2017 15:05:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=138345" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1985 (8) TMI 296 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101295</link>
      <description>Informal family understandings cannot override statutory shareholder rights or articles of association unless proved, legally enforceable and consistent with company law. Shareholders may enforce individual rights, but courts ordinarily do not intervene in internal management decisions made within corporate powers unless ultra vires conduct, fraud or another recognised exception is established. Oppression requires continuous, burdensome, harsh and wrongful conduct affecting membership rights; exclusion from management alone is insufficient. Relief for mismanagement or winding up on just and equitable grounds requires evidence of circumstances such as loss of substratum, business impossibility, deadlock or lack of probity. Bona fide commercial share allotments and properly authorised resolutions do not become oppressive merely because they alter management participation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 02 Aug 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101295</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>