https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341507 A petition alleging oppression and mismanagement should not be rejected for want of the statutory shareholding threshold merely because the petitioners' holding was reduced below that level on the filing date, where the reduction is itself alleged to have been caused by the impugned acts. The maintainability inquiry must first examine the pre-oppression shareholding and whether the complained-of conduct caused the reduction. The Limitation Act applies to proceedings before the Tribunal and Appellate Tribunal, and a petition filed within three years of the alleged oppressive acts is within time. The order of dismissal was set aside and the matter remitted for reconsideration of maintainability and merits. en-us Tue, 24 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 11 Apr 2017 07:36:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341507 A petition alleging oppression and mismanagement should not be rejected for want of the statutory shareholding threshold merely because the petitioners' holding was reduced below that level on the filing date, where the reduction is itself alleged to have been caused by the impugned acts. The maintainability inquiry must first examine the pre-oppression shareholding and whether the complained-of conduct caused the reduction. The Limitation Act applies to proceedings before the Tribunal and Appellate Tribunal, and a petition filed within three years of the alleged oppressive acts is within time. The order of dismissal was set aside and the matter remitted for reconsideration of maintainability and merits. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 24 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341507