https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790025 Oppression and mismanagement relief is unavailable where a substituted petitioner participated in corporate decisions, raised no dissent, later benefited from the transactions, and relies on unamended allegations withdrawn by original petitioners. Private placement at par under the Companies Act, 1956 requires proof of lack of probity or oppression; disclosure challenges fail where participants knew of and assented to the allotment. Unlawful financial assistance requires definite proof that company funds were directly or indirectly used to acquire its shares; unproven links between funding arrangements and share purchases are insufficient. Securities-law objections do not independently expand oppression and mismanagement jurisdiction. The impugned directions were set aside and the appeal succeeded. en-us Thu, 16 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 18 Apr 2026 10:29:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790025 Oppression and mismanagement relief is unavailable where a substituted petitioner participated in corporate decisions, raised no dissent, later benefited from the transactions, and relies on unamended allegations withdrawn by original petitioners. Private placement at par under the Companies Act, 1956 requires proof of lack of probity or oppression; disclosure challenges fail where participants knew of and assented to the allotment. Unlawful financial assistance requires definite proof that company funds were directly or indirectly used to acquire its shares; unproven links between funding arrangements and share purchases are insufficient. Securities-law objections do not independently expand oppression and mismanagement jurisdiction. The impugned directions were set aside and the appeal succeeded. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 16 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790025