https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110950 The court found that the plaintiff, a private limited company, was not a subsidiary of a public company, making Section 87(2) inapplicable. Consequently, defendant No. 1 had no voting rights, rendering the notice for the Extraordinary General Meeting (EGM) invalid. The court granted an ad interim injunction, restraining defendant No. 1 from implementing any resolutions passed in the EGM held on 4th August 2005. The case involved significant factual and legal complexities, requiring a trial for a final resolution. en-us Fri, 12 Aug 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 19 Apr 2012 13:00:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110950 The court found that the plaintiff, a private limited company, was not a subsidiary of a public company, making Section 87(2) inapplicable. Consequently, defendant No. 1 had no voting rights, rendering the notice for the Extraordinary General Meeting (EGM) invalid. The court granted an ad interim injunction, restraining defendant No. 1 from implementing any resolutions passed in the EGM held on 4th August 2005. The case involved significant factual and legal complexities, requiring a trial for a final resolution. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 12 Aug 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110950