<?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>2001 (3) TMI 932 - HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105392</link>
    <description>Section 166(2) of the Companies Act governs the venue of annual general meetings, not extraordinary general meetings. A company&#039;s board may convene an extraordinary general meeting at a location authorised by its articles, and shareholder requisition provisions do not displace that board power. Articles permitting the board to fix the meeting venue are consistent with the board&#039;s general management powers. Alleged inconvenience to a minority shareholder may not justify injunctive relief where the venue is convenient for the majority and irreparable injury and balance of convenience are not established. Claims for criminal contempt or exemplary costs require sufficient material demonstrating abuse or mala fide conduct.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 29 Mar 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Mar 2012 15:30:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=142430" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (3) TMI 932 - HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105392</link>
      <description>Section 166(2) of the Companies Act governs the venue of annual general meetings, not extraordinary general meetings. A company&#039;s board may convene an extraordinary general meeting at a location authorised by its articles, and shareholder requisition provisions do not displace that board power. Articles permitting the board to fix the meeting venue are consistent with the board&#039;s general management powers. Alleged inconvenience to a minority shareholder may not justify injunctive relief where the venue is convenient for the majority and irreparable injury and balance of convenience are not established. Claims for criminal contempt or exemplary costs require sufficient material demonstrating abuse or mala fide conduct.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 Mar 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105392</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>