https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198667 The petitioner, unlawfully removed as a director under Section 283(1)(g) of the Companies Act, 1956, due to oppressive conduct by the respondents, had their directorship reinstated by the Chairman. Despite acknowledging the strained relationship among the parties, the Chairman proposed a share purchase arrangement to resolve the dispute, directing the respondents to buy out the petitioner's shares at a fair value determined by an independent valuer. The case was concluded without costs, emphasizing the importance of a fair resolution for the company and its shareholders. en-us Wed, 20 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 07 Feb 2018 09:45:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198667 The petitioner, unlawfully removed as a director under Section 283(1)(g) of the Companies Act, 1956, due to oppressive conduct by the respondents, had their directorship reinstated by the Chairman. Despite acknowledging the strained relationship among the parties, the Chairman proposed a share purchase arrangement to resolve the dispute, directing the respondents to buy out the petitioner's shares at a fair value determined by an independent valuer. The case was concluded without costs, emphasizing the importance of a fair resolution for the company and its shareholders. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 20 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198667