<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2016 (4) TMI 1300 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197461</link>
    <description>Statutory oppression and mismanagement remedies under the Companies Act, 1956 are distinct from contractual remedies under articles of association and are not displaced by an arbitration clause. Relief requires the Company Law Board to be satisfied that grounds for winding up exist, and may be granted even contrary to the articles. Because an arbitrator derives authority from contract and cannot exercise these statutory powers, a petition invoking oppression and mismanagement jurisdiction cannot be referred to arbitration under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The request for arbitration was rejected and the writ petition failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 18 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 08 Jan 2018 09:10:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=503499" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (4) TMI 1300 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197461</link>
      <description>Statutory oppression and mismanagement remedies under the Companies Act, 1956 are distinct from contractual remedies under articles of association and are not displaced by an arbitration clause. Relief requires the Company Law Board to be satisfied that grounds for winding up exist, and may be granted even contrary to the articles. Because an arbitrator derives authority from contract and cannot exercise these statutory powers, a petition invoking oppression and mismanagement jurisdiction cannot be referred to arbitration under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The request for arbitration was rejected and the writ petition failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197461</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>