https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194969 Oppression and mismanagement disputes under Sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act, 1956 were held not referable to arbitration under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 where the controversy involved statutory shareholder rights and could not be effectively bifurcated. The third respondent was treated as a necessary party because his lease-linked involvement was relevant to complete adjudication. Share allotments made on the stated dates were found unjustified and contrary to notice and articles requirements, amounting to oppressive dilution of the petitioner's holding; they were set aside and status quo ante restored. Reliefs relating to removal from directorship, sale transactions and audited accounts were declined. en-us Tue, 09 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 09 Oct 2017 14:44:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194969 Oppression and mismanagement disputes under Sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act, 1956 were held not referable to arbitration under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 where the controversy involved statutory shareholder rights and could not be effectively bifurcated. The third respondent was treated as a necessary party because his lease-linked involvement was relevant to complete adjudication. Share allotments made on the stated dates were found unjustified and contrary to notice and articles requirements, amounting to oppressive dilution of the petitioner's holding; they were set aside and status quo ante restored. Reliefs relating to removal from directorship, sale transactions and audited accounts were declined. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 09 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194969