https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280519 A company petition alleging oppression and mismanagement was treated as referable to arbitration because the reliefs claimed arose directly from contractual arrangements containing a binding arbitration clause. The Board held that, where the grievances are intertwined with obligations under the Term Sheet, Investor Rights Agreement and Reciprocal Obligations Agreement, the dispute cannot be independently adjudicated under Sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act, 1956. As the subject matter fell within the arbitration agreement, the requirements of Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 were satisfied and the parties were directed to arbitration. en-us Tue, 26 Dec 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 08 May 2019 16:52:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280519 A company petition alleging oppression and mismanagement was treated as referable to arbitration because the reliefs claimed arose directly from contractual arrangements containing a binding arbitration clause. The Board held that, where the grievances are intertwined with obligations under the Term Sheet, Investor Rights Agreement and Reciprocal Obligations Agreement, the dispute cannot be independently adjudicated under Sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act, 1956. As the subject matter fell within the arbitration agreement, the requirements of Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 were satisfied and the parties were directed to arbitration. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 26 Dec 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280519