https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108515 The court dismissed the appeal, affirming the respondent-company's right to discontinue power allocation to the appellant for non-payment. The court ruled that the respondent did not qualify as a "State" under Article 12 and was not bound by Article 14. It found that the resolution was uniformly applied, rejected claims of oppression against the appellant, and denied the request for an interim mandatory injunction due to the absence of a breach of obligation by the respondent. en-us Thu, 13 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 02 Apr 2012 10:07:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108515 The court dismissed the appeal, affirming the respondent-company's right to discontinue power allocation to the appellant for non-payment. The court ruled that the respondent did not qualify as a "State" under Article 12 and was not bound by Article 14. It found that the resolution was uniformly applied, rejected claims of oppression against the appellant, and denied the request for an interim mandatory injunction due to the absence of a breach of obligation by the respondent. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 13 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108515