https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105405 A statutory investment scheme could be terminated prematurely where the scheme itself permitted such action and the power was traceable to the enabling Act. The HC noted that the Board had acted on relevant financial considerations, including market volatility, falling interest rates, and risk of capital erosion, with no extraneous factor shown. It further held that Article 14 was not breached merely because the scheme conferred structured discretion, and that natural justice did not require individual notice to each unit holder in a policy decision affecting large numbers of investors. The plea of promissory estoppel also failed because there was no clear promise to continue the scheme regardless of changed conditions. en-us Mon, 16 Apr 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 05 Mar 2012 15:59:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105405 A statutory investment scheme could be terminated prematurely where the scheme itself permitted such action and the power was traceable to the enabling Act. The HC noted that the Board had acted on relevant financial considerations, including market volatility, falling interest rates, and risk of capital erosion, with no extraneous factor shown. It further held that Article 14 was not breached merely because the scheme conferred structured discretion, and that natural justice did not require individual notice to each unit holder in a policy decision affecting large numbers of investors. The plea of promissory estoppel also failed because there was no clear promise to continue the scheme regardless of changed conditions. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 16 Apr 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105405