https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200382 Articles of association imposing a pre-emptive restriction on share transfers required individual shareholder consent before an outsider or nominee could receive the shares, and that consent could not be inferred from mere board attendance or representation; the proposed 9% transfer was therefore invalid. The deceased shareholder's 2% holding could not be transmitted and then transferred to the same nominee without proof of a specific legacy or executor's assent, and the same transfer restrictions applied; that route was unlawful. The conduct was treated as a concerted attempt to bypass the articles and foreign equity dilution policy, so oppression was established and relief under Sections 397 and 398, including share transfer directions and management arrangements, was justified. en-us Wed, 13 Oct 1982 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 27 Mar 2018 14:21:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200382 Articles of association imposing a pre-emptive restriction on share transfers required individual shareholder consent before an outsider or nominee could receive the shares, and that consent could not be inferred from mere board attendance or representation; the proposed 9% transfer was therefore invalid. The deceased shareholder's 2% holding could not be transmitted and then transferred to the same nominee without proof of a specific legacy or executor's assent, and the same transfer restrictions applied; that route was unlawful. The conduct was treated as a concerted attempt to bypass the articles and foreign equity dilution policy, so oppression was established and relief under Sections 397 and 398, including share transfer directions and management arrangements, was justified. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 13 Oct 1982 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200382