https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196357 Reliefs sought in a writ petition and a company petition under Sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act were substantially overlapping, with both proceedings centring on increase in authorised share capital and related allegations of money laundering and RBI violation. Because an alternative remedy was available, including recourse before the Director under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, interference with the Single Judge's order was not warranted. The appeal was therefore not entertained and the request for interference was declined. en-us Thu, 02 Aug 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 28 Nov 2017 17:59:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196357 Reliefs sought in a writ petition and a company petition under Sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act were substantially overlapping, with both proceedings centring on increase in authorised share capital and related allegations of money laundering and RBI violation. Because an alternative remedy was available, including recourse before the Director under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, interference with the Single Judge's order was not warranted. The appeal was therefore not entertained and the request for interference was declined. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 02 Aug 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196357