https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340250 The Tribunal upheld the validity of the company petition filed by Mr. Bartholomew Kamya under Sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act, 1956. It dismissed the challenge to the maintainability of the petition, ruling that the authorization given to Mr. Kamya was in accordance with legal requirements. The Tribunal found the "Appointment of Manager's Resolution" and subsequent authorization to be valid, concluding that Mr. Kamya had the authority to initiate legal proceedings on behalf of the company. No costs were awarded in the matter. en-us Fri, 10 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 18 Mar 2017 17:43:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340250 The Tribunal upheld the validity of the company petition filed by Mr. Bartholomew Kamya under Sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act, 1956. It dismissed the challenge to the maintainability of the petition, ruling that the authorization given to Mr. Kamya was in accordance with legal requirements. The Tribunal found the "Appointment of Manager's Resolution" and subsequent authorization to be valid, concluding that Mr. Kamya had the authority to initiate legal proceedings on behalf of the company. No costs were awarded in the matter. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 10 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340250