https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328476 The court dismissed the petition under Section 186 of the Companies Act, 1956, as the petitioners failed to establish the impracticability of calling, holding, and conducting meetings. The respondents' willingness to attend meetings, subject to receiving necessary information, indicated that calling a meeting was not impracticable. Therefore, the court ruled in favor of the respondents, emphasizing the importance of corporate democracy and the limited application of Section 186 in cases where all contingencies are genuinely impracticable. en-us Tue, 15 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 01 Jun 2016 10:15:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328476 The court dismissed the petition under Section 186 of the Companies Act, 1956, as the petitioners failed to establish the impracticability of calling, holding, and conducting meetings. The respondents' willingness to attend meetings, subject to receiving necessary information, indicated that calling a meeting was not impracticable. Therefore, the court ruled in favor of the respondents, emphasizing the importance of corporate democracy and the limited application of Section 186 in cases where all contingencies are genuinely impracticable. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 15 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328476