https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277734 The High Court criticized the Company Law Board's refusal of interim relief based on pending civil suit and writ petition, emphasizing the CLB's exclusive jurisdiction over oppression and mismanagement issues. The High Court found the appellant entitled to interim relief, noting a strong prima facie case and unjust treatment by minority shareholders. It directed the CLB to maintain the status quo ante, allowing joint operation of bank accounts and appellant's CEO appointment rights. The appeal was disposed of with costs awarded, clarifying observations not binding on CLB's final decision in the petition under Sections 397 and 398. en-us Tue, 05 Sep 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 20 Dec 2018 10:54:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277734 The High Court criticized the Company Law Board's refusal of interim relief based on pending civil suit and writ petition, emphasizing the CLB's exclusive jurisdiction over oppression and mismanagement issues. The High Court found the appellant entitled to interim relief, noting a strong prima facie case and unjust treatment by minority shareholders. It directed the CLB to maintain the status quo ante, allowing joint operation of bank accounts and appellant's CEO appointment rights. The appeal was disposed of with costs awarded, clarifying observations not binding on CLB's final decision in the petition under Sections 397 and 398. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 05 Sep 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277734