https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199384 A petition alleging mismanagement under Section 398 of the Companies Act, 1956 failed because the record did not show a material change in management or control sufficient to attract the provision. The arbitration objection also failed since the respondent had participated on merits without making a timely Section 8 application under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The earlier withdrawn civil suit did not bar the statutory petition, but the declarations sought as to who was Managing Director or director were outside the proper scope of Section 398 on these facts, so no substantive relief was granted and the interim orders were vacated. en-us Thu, 14 Aug 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 27 Feb 2018 15:43:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199384 A petition alleging mismanagement under Section 398 of the Companies Act, 1956 failed because the record did not show a material change in management or control sufficient to attract the provision. The arbitration objection also failed since the respondent had participated on merits without making a timely Section 8 application under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The earlier withdrawn civil suit did not bar the statutory petition, but the declarations sought as to who was Managing Director or director were outside the proper scope of Section 398 on these facts, so no substantive relief was granted and the interim orders were vacated. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 14 Aug 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199384