https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383731 A petition under Sections 241 and 242 of the Companies Act, 2013 was held to be within limitation under Article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963 because the alleged suppression of shareholding changes, non-reflection of the petitioner in statutory records, and absence of notice of the annual general meeting constituted a continuing course of conduct; the filing was also within three years of the asserted discovery of the misconduct. The findings of oppression and mismanagement were upheld because the transfer of majority shares, the board approval, the failure to record the petitioner's status, and exclusion from company affairs remained unrebutted, and the corrective directions to rectify records were sustained. en-us Thu, 25 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 10 Sep 2019 11:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383731 A petition under Sections 241 and 242 of the Companies Act, 2013 was held to be within limitation under Article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963 because the alleged suppression of shareholding changes, non-reflection of the petitioner in statutory records, and absence of notice of the annual general meeting constituted a continuing course of conduct; the filing was also within three years of the asserted discovery of the misconduct. The findings of oppression and mismanagement were upheld because the transfer of majority shares, the board approval, the failure to record the petitioner's status, and exclusion from company affairs remained unrebutted, and the corrective directions to rectify records were sustained. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 25 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383731