<?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>1993 (4) TMI 221 - HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102359</link>
    <description>A special notice for removal of directors under section 284 of the Companies Act, 1956 operates as an independent statutory procedure and is not controlled by section 188. It requires special notice and gives the concerned director a right to be heard, but does not require disclosure of reasons for removal. The notice convening the annual general meeting was not invalid merely because earlier board minutes had not been confirmed, as the Act does not make later confirmation a condition precedent. Findings of mala fides in proxy collection and reliance on alleged contempt in another proceeding were not sustainable at the interlocutory stage, and the interim injunctions restraining implementation of shareholder resolutions were liable to be set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 22 Apr 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 16:13:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=139408" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1993 (4) TMI 221 - HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102359</link>
      <description>A special notice for removal of directors under section 284 of the Companies Act, 1956 operates as an independent statutory procedure and is not controlled by section 188. It requires special notice and gives the concerned director a right to be heard, but does not require disclosure of reasons for removal. The notice convening the annual general meeting was not invalid merely because earlier board minutes had not been confirmed, as the Act does not make later confirmation a condition precedent. Findings of mala fides in proxy collection and reliance on alleged contempt in another proceeding were not sustainable at the interlocutory stage, and the interim injunctions restraining implementation of shareholder resolutions were liable to be set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 22 Apr 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102359</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>