<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2014 (9) TMI 1183 - COMPANY LAW BOARD, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279314</link>
    <description>Statutory remedies for oppression and mismanagement, including cancellation of shares, removal of directors and investigation, fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of the company forum and are not displaced by an asserted arbitration clause. Referral under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act requires a concluded arbitration agreement, identity of parties and subject matter, timely invocation, and arbitrability of the reliefs sought. Where promoters had not all signed the arrangement and petition parties were not coextensive with arbitration parties, those requirements were not met. Contractual arrangements in the articles cannot override statutory company-law remedies; the referral request was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 Mar 2019 07:27:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=562550" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (9) TMI 1183 - COMPANY LAW BOARD, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279314</link>
      <description>Statutory remedies for oppression and mismanagement, including cancellation of shares, removal of directors and investigation, fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of the company forum and are not displaced by an asserted arbitration clause. Referral under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act requires a concluded arbitration agreement, identity of parties and subject matter, timely invocation, and arbitrability of the reliefs sought. Where promoters had not all signed the arrangement and petition parties were not coextensive with arbitration parties, those requirements were not met. Contractual arrangements in the articles cannot override statutory company-law remedies; the referral request was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279314</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>