https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106553 Civil court jurisdiction over a suit alleging oppression and mismanagement was impliedly barred because the Companies Act, 1956 provided a complete self-contained remedy before the Company Law Board. The Act vested jurisdiction in the Board under sections 397 and 398, regulated locus under section 399, and empowered wide relief under sections 402 to 406, with an appeal to the High Court under section 10F. Applying the principle of exclusion by necessary implication, the dispute was held to fall within the exclusive statutory forum, and the plaint had to be returned for presentation before the Company Law Board. en-us Thu, 29 Nov 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 14 Mar 2012 16:59:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106553 Civil court jurisdiction over a suit alleging oppression and mismanagement was impliedly barred because the Companies Act, 1956 provided a complete self-contained remedy before the Company Law Board. The Act vested jurisdiction in the Board under sections 397 and 398, regulated locus under section 399, and empowered wide relief under sections 402 to 406, with an appeal to the High Court under section 10F. Applying the principle of exclusion by necessary implication, the dispute was held to fall within the exclusive statutory forum, and the plaint had to be returned for presentation before the Company Law Board. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 29 Nov 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106553