<?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>2005 (1) TMI 409 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110330</link>
    <description>A director ordinarily owes fiduciary duties to the company, not to individual shareholders, unless special circumstances create such a duty; no general duty to advise shareholders on taking up a share offer was found. The allotment of 6,475 shares was upheld because the broad-basing decision and allotment were admitted in the pleadings, but the diversion of 3,000 shares to the appellants&#039; children and 500 shares from the FRG block was invalid for lack of proof of renunciation. A claim to 8,000 inherited shares could not be decided in an oppression petition, and the transfer of 9,415 shares to Indreni did not sustain oppression relief. No case of oppression or mismanagement was made out on the pleadings and proof.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 20 Jan 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 22 Sep 2025 19:38:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=147346" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (1) TMI 409 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110330</link>
      <description>A director ordinarily owes fiduciary duties to the company, not to individual shareholders, unless special circumstances create such a duty; no general duty to advise shareholders on taking up a share offer was found. The allotment of 6,475 shares was upheld because the broad-basing decision and allotment were admitted in the pleadings, but the diversion of 3,000 shares to the appellants&#039; children and 500 shares from the FRG block was invalid for lack of proof of renunciation. A claim to 8,000 inherited shares could not be decided in an oppression petition, and the transfer of 9,415 shares to Indreni did not sustain oppression relief. No case of oppression or mismanagement was made out on the pleadings and proof.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Jan 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110330</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>