https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397488 A civil suit challenging suspension of an individual club member was maintainable because the dispute did not amount to oppression, mismanagement, or a class action under Sections 241, 244 and 245 of the Companies Act, 2013. The Tribunal route was not shown to be the exclusive forum, especially as the proviso to Section 244 gives discretionary waiver power, so Section 430 did not expressly or impliedly exclude the civil court's ordinary jurisdiction under Section 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The civil court's jurisdiction was therefore not barred. en-us Thu, 30 Jul 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 20 Aug 2020 10:01:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397488 A civil suit challenging suspension of an individual club member was maintainable because the dispute did not amount to oppression, mismanagement, or a class action under Sections 241, 244 and 245 of the Companies Act, 2013. The Tribunal route was not shown to be the exclusive forum, especially as the proviso to Section 244 gives discretionary waiver power, so Section 430 did not expressly or impliedly exclude the civil court's ordinary jurisdiction under Section 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The civil court's jurisdiction was therefore not barred. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 30 Jul 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397488