https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191480 Civil court jurisdiction was not impliedly barred where the dispute concerned individual membership rights, alleged fraud in company meetings, and reliefs such as declarations and injunctions; the preventive remedy under Sections 397 and 398 was not an adequate substitute, so the suits were maintainable. The board meetings of 18 August 1992 and 29 August 1992 were invalid because notice was not properly served, the co-option of directors lacked bona fides, and the resolutions on equipment purchase, hospital lease, lien enforcement, and share sale were not lawfully passed. The requisitioned general body meeting of 6 November 1992 was valid, as a proper requisition entitled the members to convene it when the board failed to do so. en-us Thu, 10 Dec 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 05 Apr 2017 14:36:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191480 Civil court jurisdiction was not impliedly barred where the dispute concerned individual membership rights, alleged fraud in company meetings, and reliefs such as declarations and injunctions; the preventive remedy under Sections 397 and 398 was not an adequate substitute, so the suits were maintainable. The board meetings of 18 August 1992 and 29 August 1992 were invalid because notice was not properly served, the co-option of directors lacked bona fides, and the resolutions on equipment purchase, hospital lease, lien enforcement, and share sale were not lawfully passed. The requisitioned general body meeting of 6 November 1992 was valid, as a proper requisition entitled the members to convene it when the board failed to do so. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 10 Dec 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191480