https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259925 A shareholder suit could not be used to indirectly challenge an arbitral award passed against the company. The Court distinguished personal shareholder rights from corporate rights and treated the attack on the award as an attempt to bypass the statutory setting-aside mechanism under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. That challenge was also time-barred, so the plaint failed to that extent. Reliefs not confined to setting aside the award were not rejected at this stage and were left for trial on merits. en-us Thu, 14 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 26 May 2015 07:48:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259925 A shareholder suit could not be used to indirectly challenge an arbitral award passed against the company. The Court distinguished personal shareholder rights from corporate rights and treated the attack on the award as an attempt to bypass the statutory setting-aside mechanism under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. That challenge was also time-barred, so the plaint failed to that extent. Reliefs not confined to setting aside the award were not rejected at this stage and were left for trial on merits. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 14 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259925