https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194692 The petition was dismissed primarily due to non-maintainability under section 399 of the Act, as the petitioner did not meet the eligibility criteria of holding 1/10th of the total members or issued capital of the company. Additionally, the court found that the petitioner had suppressed material facts and failed to prove the allegations of oppression and mismanagement. The enforcement of the agreement for the allotment of shares was deemed suspicious, and the court upheld the validity of the removal and appointment of directors. en-us Thu, 22 Aug 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 19 Sep 2017 17:50:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194692 The petition was dismissed primarily due to non-maintainability under section 399 of the Act, as the petitioner did not meet the eligibility criteria of holding 1/10th of the total members or issued capital of the company. Additionally, the court found that the petitioner had suppressed material facts and failed to prove the allegations of oppression and mismanagement. The enforcement of the agreement for the allotment of shares was deemed suspicious, and the court upheld the validity of the removal and appointment of directors. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 22 Aug 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194692