https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260847 The judge found the petition maintainable under Company Law Board Regulations, 1991, dismissing the Respondent's challenge. Allegations of suppression of material facts were deemed premature for dismissal. The court upheld the existence of a case under sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act, rejecting the Respondent's contention. The judge ruled that an incorrect statement regarding compliance filings did not warrant dismissal. The ad-interim order was modified to allow the Respondent to remove the Petitioner as a Director based on misappropriation allegations, while maintaining the status quo on shareholding patterns. en-us Wed, 14 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 25 Jun 2015 06:11:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260847 The judge found the petition maintainable under Company Law Board Regulations, 1991, dismissing the Respondent's challenge. Allegations of suppression of material facts were deemed premature for dismissal. The court upheld the existence of a case under sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act, rejecting the Respondent's contention. The judge ruled that an incorrect statement regarding compliance filings did not warrant dismissal. The ad-interim order was modified to allow the Respondent to remove the Petitioner as a Director based on misappropriation allegations, while maintaining the status quo on shareholding patterns. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 14 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260847