https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=215015 Quasi-partnership principles did not apply because the company's articles contained no provision for family representation on the board and its management was treated as professional rather than family-based. Allegations of oppression and mismanagement, including exclusion from management, lack of meeting notices, asset sales and financial impropriety, were not established; the company's management practices, statutory compliance, dividends and share transmissions were considered protective of shareholder interests. Reliefs seeking board appointments, amendments to the articles, audit or administration, share purchase and business separation were therefore unavailable. The supporting shareholder's separate request for relief also lacked an independent basis. Exit could be pursued through the articles' share-transfer provisions. en-us Mon, 06 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 04 Feb 2013 16:41:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=215015 Quasi-partnership principles did not apply because the company's articles contained no provision for family representation on the board and its management was treated as professional rather than family-based. Allegations of oppression and mismanagement, including exclusion from management, lack of meeting notices, asset sales and financial impropriety, were not established; the company's management practices, statutory compliance, dividends and share transmissions were considered protective of shareholder interests. Reliefs seeking board appointments, amendments to the articles, audit or administration, share purchase and business separation were therefore unavailable. The supporting shareholder's separate request for relief also lacked an independent basis. Exit could be pursued through the articles' share-transfer provisions. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 06 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=215015