https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191053 An allotment of shares linked to transfer and retransfer of developmental rights was not treated as fraudulent or a sham because the project was conceived on the basis that the land value would fund the venture, the petitioner had itself referred to that value in communications, and it knew of the commercial structure when entering the arrangement. In proceedings under sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act, 1956, equitable relief was refused because the petitioner's conduct, prior knowledge, waiver, estoppel and acquiescence showed that it had disabled itself from discretionary intervention. The oppression and mismanagement petition was rejected, with only limited exit or participation options indicated. en-us Wed, 13 Jun 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 18 Mar 2017 15:29:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191053 An allotment of shares linked to transfer and retransfer of developmental rights was not treated as fraudulent or a sham because the project was conceived on the basis that the land value would fund the venture, the petitioner had itself referred to that value in communications, and it knew of the commercial structure when entering the arrangement. In proceedings under sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act, 1956, equitable relief was refused because the petitioner's conduct, prior knowledge, waiver, estoppel and acquiescence showed that it had disabled itself from discretionary intervention. The oppression and mismanagement petition was rejected, with only limited exit or participation options indicated. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 13 Jun 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191053