https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103031 Winding up on the just and equitable ground was not justified because the company did not retain the features of a quasi-partnership after incorporation: its articles allowed transfer of fully paid shares and majority decision-making, and the family arrangement showed an accepted division of shareholding. Allegations of oppression, mismanagement and diversion of assets fell within the statutory oppression and mismanagement remedies, which provided an efficacious alternative to dissolution. As the company was a profitable going concern, the drastic remedy of winding up was treated as one of last resort and was refused in the court's discretion. The petition was therefore rejected, leaving the petitioners to pursue statutory relief. en-us Wed, 20 Dec 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 20 Feb 2012 13:25:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103031 Winding up on the just and equitable ground was not justified because the company did not retain the features of a quasi-partnership after incorporation: its articles allowed transfer of fully paid shares and majority decision-making, and the family arrangement showed an accepted division of shareholding. Allegations of oppression, mismanagement and diversion of assets fell within the statutory oppression and mismanagement remedies, which provided an efficacious alternative to dissolution. As the company was a profitable going concern, the drastic remedy of winding up was treated as one of last resort and was refused in the court's discretion. The petition was therefore rejected, leaving the petitioners to pursue statutory relief. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 20 Dec 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103031