https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196748 The Board found that the creation of a new majority through the allotment of shares was oppressive to the petitioners. However, due to ongoing disputes and a family settlement agreement, the Board concluded that the company could not function properly with warring groups holding shares. The appropriate relief was for the shares of the oppressed to be bought by the oppressor. In light of a pending dispute in the Calcutta High Court regarding the family settlement, the Board decided not to invoke discretionary powers and disposed of the petition with no order as to costs. en-us Mon, 26 Jul 1993 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 13 Dec 2017 15:08:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196748 The Board found that the creation of a new majority through the allotment of shares was oppressive to the petitioners. However, due to ongoing disputes and a family settlement agreement, the Board concluded that the company could not function properly with warring groups holding shares. The appropriate relief was for the shares of the oppressed to be bought by the oppressor. In light of a pending dispute in the Calcutta High Court regarding the family settlement, the Board decided not to invoke discretionary powers and disposed of the petition with no order as to costs. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 26 Jul 1993 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196748