https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338263 The court ruled in favor of the respondents, finding no merit in the petitioners' claims of oppression and mismanagement. The court determined that the actions of the respondents were not oppressive, emphasizing the democratic rights of shareholders and the equities of the case. The petitioners failed to prove that the respondents hindered in clearing statutory dues or that the proposal for removal of a director in a family company was oppressive. The court directed the company to allow the director to continue for salary purposes but not interfere in company affairs, upholding the mother's casting vote and another director's appointment. en-us Thu, 08 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 31 Jan 2017 06:40:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338263 The court ruled in favor of the respondents, finding no merit in the petitioners' claims of oppression and mismanagement. The court determined that the actions of the respondents were not oppressive, emphasizing the democratic rights of shareholders and the equities of the case. The petitioners failed to prove that the respondents hindered in clearing statutory dues or that the proposal for removal of a director in a family company was oppressive. The court directed the company to allow the director to continue for salary purposes but not interfere in company affairs, upholding the mother's casting vote and another director's appointment. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 08 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338263