https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126921 The bench denied the petitioners' request for interim reliefs under Sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act, 1956, citing a lack of prima facie evidence to support their claims of oppression and mismanagement by the respondents. The bench found no grounds to intervene in the business judgment of the respondents regarding the closure of the company's operations in 2007. Respondent No. 2 provided an undertaking not to deal with fixed assets until a succession matter was resolved, leading to the denial of interim reliefs but granting liberty to mention for future proceedings. en-us Thu, 01 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 06 Feb 2013 10:03:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126921 The bench denied the petitioners' request for interim reliefs under Sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act, 1956, citing a lack of prima facie evidence to support their claims of oppression and mismanagement by the respondents. The bench found no grounds to intervene in the business judgment of the respondents regarding the closure of the company's operations in 2007. Respondent No. 2 provided an undertaking not to deal with fixed assets until a succession matter was resolved, leading to the denial of interim reliefs but granting liberty to mention for future proceedings. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 01 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126921