https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113421 The court dismissed the Special Leave Petition, finding no merit in the allegations of oppression and mismanagement. The court upheld the decisions of the CLB and the High Court, emphasizing that the petitioners' claims did not meet the legal standards for relief under Sections 397, 398, 402, and 403 of the Companies Act, 1956. The court also noted the active involvement of petitioner No. 2 in the company's management, which undermined the claims of oppression and mismanagement. The court concluded that the issues raised were more appropriately addressed as breaches of contract rather than under the provisions for oppression and mismanagement. en-us Fri, 07 May 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 04 Aug 2017 14:55:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113421 The court dismissed the Special Leave Petition, finding no merit in the allegations of oppression and mismanagement. The court upheld the decisions of the CLB and the High Court, emphasizing that the petitioners' claims did not meet the legal standards for relief under Sections 397, 398, 402, and 403 of the Companies Act, 1956. The court also noted the active involvement of petitioner No. 2 in the company's management, which undermined the claims of oppression and mismanagement. The court concluded that the issues raised were more appropriately addressed as breaches of contract rather than under the provisions for oppression and mismanagement. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 07 May 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113421