<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2023 (11) TMI 969 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446078</link>
    <description>NCLAT dismissed appeal challenging tribunal&#039;s order in oppression and mismanagement case. Appellant challenged reduction of shareholding and unauthorized property sales. Tribunal correctly dismissed company petition after parties reached mutual settlement through compromise deed. NCLAT held tribunal lacked jurisdiction to enforce private compromise agreements and rightly avoided multiplicity of proceedings. Appellant&#039;s contention of continuing oppression despite settlement was misconceived. Appropriate remedy lies with HC and civil courts, not company law tribunals, for enforcement of settlement terms.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 23 Nov 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 25 Nov 2023 06:23:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=732914" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (11) TMI 969 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446078</link>
      <description>NCLAT dismissed appeal challenging tribunal&#039;s order in oppression and mismanagement case. Appellant challenged reduction of shareholding and unauthorized property sales. Tribunal correctly dismissed company petition after parties reached mutual settlement through compromise deed. NCLAT held tribunal lacked jurisdiction to enforce private compromise agreements and rightly avoided multiplicity of proceedings. Appellant&#039;s contention of continuing oppression despite settlement was misconceived. Appropriate remedy lies with HC and civil courts, not company law tribunals, for enforcement of settlement terms.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 23 Nov 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446078</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>