https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332199 The court addressed allegations of mismanagement and oppression, lack of a functional Board of Directors, disputes over director appointments, fabrication of records, and a deadlock affecting the company's interests. An interim order was issued under sections 241(g) & (h) read with section 242 of the 2013 Act, mandating the nomination of directors by both parties to resolve the deadlock and ensure the company's functionality. Future legal proceedings involved the filing of written statements and rejoinders to facilitate a comprehensive exchange of arguments and evidence. en-us Fri, 10 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 08 Sep 2016 18:50:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332199 The court addressed allegations of mismanagement and oppression, lack of a functional Board of Directors, disputes over director appointments, fabrication of records, and a deadlock affecting the company's interests. An interim order was issued under sections 241(g) & (h) read with section 242 of the 2013 Act, mandating the nomination of directors by both parties to resolve the deadlock and ensure the company's functionality. Future legal proceedings involved the filing of written statements and rejoinders to facilitate a comprehensive exchange of arguments and evidence. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 10 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332199