https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260782 The articles were construed to preserve the promoter nomination rights in favour of the deceased promoter's successors, legal representatives and assigns, because those rights were embedded in shareholding and were not merely personal. The court treated the right to recommend directors as a substantive right to nominate, but one that had to be exercised jointly by the two promoter groups and not unilaterally. Appointments made on a unilateral basis, including related board and office-holder changes, were held ultra vires, while the challenge to the managing director and chief executive officer's continuation was not accepted at the interim stage. No reserved personal board seat was recognised, but declassification of the plaintiffs' promoter status was restrained. en-us Thu, 04 Jun 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 23 Jun 2015 17:12:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260782 The articles were construed to preserve the promoter nomination rights in favour of the deceased promoter's successors, legal representatives and assigns, because those rights were embedded in shareholding and were not merely personal. The court treated the right to recommend directors as a substantive right to nominate, but one that had to be exercised jointly by the two promoter groups and not unilaterally. Appointments made on a unilateral basis, including related board and office-holder changes, were held ultra vires, while the challenge to the managing director and chief executive officer's continuation was not accepted at the interim stage. No reserved personal board seat was recognised, but declassification of the plaintiffs' promoter status was restrained. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 04 Jun 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260782