https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113170 The court dismissed all appeals and upheld the interim relief granted to the plaintiffs. It found the transfer of shares by Defendant No. 1 to Defendant No. 4 void due to violations of the SPA, misrepresentation, fraud, and court orders. The validity of clause 6.1 of the SPA was upheld, not conflicting with Section 111A of the Companies Act. The agreement dated 5-12-2002 did not render the suits infructuous, and Defendant No. 4 was denied relief for the appointment of a Court Receiver. en-us Wed, 01 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 25 Sep 2014 15:12:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113170 The court dismissed all appeals and upheld the interim relief granted to the plaintiffs. It found the transfer of shares by Defendant No. 1 to Defendant No. 4 void due to violations of the SPA, misrepresentation, fraud, and court orders. The validity of clause 6.1 of the SPA was upheld, not conflicting with Section 111A of the Companies Act. The agreement dated 5-12-2002 did not render the suits infructuous, and Defendant No. 4 was denied relief for the appointment of a Court Receiver. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 01 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113170