https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291958 A suit for a declaration that existing directors had ceased to hold office was not maintainable under Section 42 of the Specific Relief Act because that provision applies only where the plaintiff seeks a declaration of a legal character or a right to property denied by the defendant. Even apart from maintainability, the court held that granting such relief was inappropriate where it would leave the company without a managing agency. On the merits, the articles requiring annual election of directors did not cause an automatic vacancy merely because a fresh election had not been completed; the previous directors continued until successors were validly elected in general meeting. en-us Tue, 15 May 1928 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 02 Dec 2020 10:02:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291958 A suit for a declaration that existing directors had ceased to hold office was not maintainable under Section 42 of the Specific Relief Act because that provision applies only where the plaintiff seeks a declaration of a legal character or a right to property denied by the defendant. Even apart from maintainability, the court held that granting such relief was inappropriate where it would leave the company without a managing agency. On the merits, the articles requiring annual election of directors did not cause an automatic vacancy merely because a fresh election had not been completed; the previous directors continued until successors were validly elected in general meeting. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 15 May 1928 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291958