https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105392 The court dismissed the appeal, ruling in favor of the defendant. It held that the Board had the authority to decide the location of the extraordinary general meeting (EGM) as it was not an annual general meeting (AGM). Section 166(2) of the Companies Act did not apply to EGMs, and the Articles of Association allowing the Board to convene EGMs were valid. The court found no grounds for granting an injunction, denied the request for criminal contempt proceedings against the plaintiff, and declined to award exemplary costs to the respondent. The appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs. en-us Thu, 29 Mar 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 05 Mar 2012 15:30:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105392 The court dismissed the appeal, ruling in favor of the defendant. It held that the Board had the authority to decide the location of the extraordinary general meeting (EGM) as it was not an annual general meeting (AGM). Section 166(2) of the Companies Act did not apply to EGMs, and the Articles of Association allowing the Board to convene EGMs were valid. The court found no grounds for granting an injunction, denied the request for criminal contempt proceedings against the plaintiff, and declined to award exemplary costs to the respondent. The appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 29 Mar 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105392