https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197597 The court dismissed the company petition as the petitioner failed to prove the fraudulence of the annual return for 2003 and relinquished rights through a deed of arrangement and declaration. The petitioner's requests for an independent board, chartered accountant, investigation into fund siphoning, property restraint, compensation for losses, and benefits restoration were not addressed or considered by the court. The interim injunction was vacated, and the petitioner and her children were deemed no longer shareholders entitled to relief under Sections 397/398 of the Companies Act, 1956. en-us Tue, 08 Nov 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 10 Jan 2018 15:36:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197597 The court dismissed the company petition as the petitioner failed to prove the fraudulence of the annual return for 2003 and relinquished rights through a deed of arrangement and declaration. The petitioner's requests for an independent board, chartered accountant, investigation into fund siphoning, property restraint, compensation for losses, and benefits restoration were not addressed or considered by the court. The interim injunction was vacated, and the petitioner and her children were deemed no longer shareholders entitled to relief under Sections 397/398 of the Companies Act, 1956. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 08 Nov 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197597