https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289626 In a private company oppression dispute, appointment of an additional director was upheld where it aligned with the articles, board resolutions and the investor's legitimate interest in board representation. Extraordinary general meetings, increase of authorised share capital and rights issue were treated as valid because service of notice was proved, the capital increase concerned the memorandum, and the funding steps reflected genuine financial need. Shifting of the registered office was not treated as oppressive where consent and company benefit were shown, even if procedure was not strictly followed. The commentary also notes that equitable relief may permit the shareholder either to subscribe to the rights issue or exit on valuation terms. en-us Mon, 02 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 10 Aug 2020 12:10:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289626 In a private company oppression dispute, appointment of an additional director was upheld where it aligned with the articles, board resolutions and the investor's legitimate interest in board representation. Extraordinary general meetings, increase of authorised share capital and rights issue were treated as valid because service of notice was proved, the capital increase concerned the memorandum, and the funding steps reflected genuine financial need. Shifting of the registered office was not treated as oppressive where consent and company benefit were shown, even if procedure was not strictly followed. The commentary also notes that equitable relief may permit the shareholder either to subscribe to the rights issue or exit on valuation terms. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 02 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289626