https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171057 The court found that the petitions were maintainable as the petitioners held the requisite percentage of shares before the contested allotment. The preferential allotment of convertible warrants to promoters at a lower price was not deemed oppressive, as it aimed to maintain shareholding. The Board directed the company to address reduced public holding by issuing shares to financial institutions or willing shareholders if necessary. The petitioners' claims of oppression and mismanagement were not substantiated, leading to the dismissal of the first petition and issuance of specific directions for implementation. en-us Tue, 31 Mar 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 08 Jul 2015 15:35:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171057 The court found that the petitions were maintainable as the petitioners held the requisite percentage of shares before the contested allotment. The preferential allotment of convertible warrants to promoters at a lower price was not deemed oppressive, as it aimed to maintain shareholding. The Board directed the company to address reduced public holding by issuing shares to financial institutions or willing shareholders if necessary. The petitioners' claims of oppression and mismanagement were not substantiated, leading to the dismissal of the first petition and issuance of specific directions for implementation. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 31 Mar 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171057