https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106223 The High Court held jurisdiction over the company despite its registered office being outside its territorial jurisdiction. The Court found oppression and mismanagement by the MPJ group, annulling certain share transfers and directing valuation and sale of shares, giving majority shareholders priority. The alleged wrongful sale of company assets was deemed invalid without court approval. The Court refrained from ruling on the alleged wrongful surrender of sub-tenancy rights due to pending civil suits. The application was disposed of with directions for share valuation and sale, with no stay granted, allowing for an appeal to the Supreme Court. en-us Thu, 14 Oct 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 13 Mar 2012 12:40:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106223 The High Court held jurisdiction over the company despite its registered office being outside its territorial jurisdiction. The Court found oppression and mismanagement by the MPJ group, annulling certain share transfers and directing valuation and sale of shares, giving majority shareholders priority. The alleged wrongful sale of company assets was deemed invalid without court approval. The Court refrained from ruling on the alleged wrongful surrender of sub-tenancy rights due to pending civil suits. The application was disposed of with directions for share valuation and sale, with no stay granted, allowing for an appeal to the Supreme Court. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 14 Oct 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106223