https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432220 Dispute concerning shareholding and company-law remedies was held to fall under the Companies Act, 2013 because the relevant events arose after its commencement and the repeal-and-savings framework supported the newer regime. The Court also held that Section 430 did not bar civil court jurisdiction where the company had already been dissolved, because the statutory Tribunal mechanism could not then provide an effective remedy and the exclusion of civil jurisdiction must be strictly construed. The plaint rejection was set aside and the suit restored, with the civil action maintained under Section 9 CPC. en-us Fri, 23 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 31 Dec 2022 11:17:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432220 Dispute concerning shareholding and company-law remedies was held to fall under the Companies Act, 2013 because the relevant events arose after its commencement and the repeal-and-savings framework supported the newer regime. The Court also held that Section 430 did not bar civil court jurisdiction where the company had already been dissolved, because the statutory Tribunal mechanism could not then provide an effective remedy and the exclusion of civil jurisdiction must be strictly construed. The plaint rejection was set aside and the suit restored, with the civil action maintained under Section 9 CPC. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 23 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432220