<?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>2026 (5) TMI 1107 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791905</link>
    <description>In oppression and mismanagement proceedings, the appellate forum upheld dismissal of the interim restraint sought against the proposed EOGM and disposal of assets, finding no illegality where the appellants had an opportunity to subscribe to the share issues and the meeting was convened on valid notice. It also maintained the status quo protecting asset sales during pendency of the company petition. However, applications relating to amendment of the petition and challenge to later letters of offer were found to raise distinct issues arising from earlier events and were restored for fresh consideration on merits through separate reasoned orders.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 15 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 20 May 2026 08:31:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=902887" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (5) TMI 1107 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791905</link>
      <description>In oppression and mismanagement proceedings, the appellate forum upheld dismissal of the interim restraint sought against the proposed EOGM and disposal of assets, finding no illegality where the appellants had an opportunity to subscribe to the share issues and the meeting was convened on valid notice. It also maintained the status quo protecting asset sales during pendency of the company petition. However, applications relating to amendment of the petition and challenge to later letters of offer were found to raise distinct issues arising from earlier events and were restored for fresh consideration on merits through separate reasoned orders.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791905</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>