Oppressive - Judgment Search Results

Little Brothers of the Oppressed Vs. the Government of India and anr.

Court: Chennai

Reported in: 1992(38)ECC318

..... secular and its objects are to help encourage and educate the socially economically and culturally oppressed by convening conference and to make them aware of their legal rights and liberties and ..... permission for acceptance of the above said foriegn contribution by the little brothers of the oppressed vellore the order dated 15 7 86 is challenged in w p 9647 86 2 .....

Tata Consultancy Services Limited Vs. Cyrus Investments Pvt Ltd

Court: Supreme Court of India

..... prejudicial to the company public interest any member or interest or members or b oppressive to any b oppressive to member or b prejudicial to some part of the members public interest members ..... the skyrocketing of the appreciation of the value of investment is also due to oppressive conduct or despite oppressive conduct 19 43 whatever it be the right to claim proportionate representation is not .....

Ramashankar Prosad and ors. Vs. Sindri Iron Foundry (P) Ltd. and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: AIR1966Cal512,70CWN520

..... no 1 of 1956bill no 46 b of 1953chapter vichaptep viprevention of oppression andmismanagementprevention of oppression andmismanagementa powers of courta powers of court396 application to court for relief ..... obtain some benefit by his act of oppression according to his lordship if there is oppression it remains oppression even though the oppression is due simply to the controlling shareholder .....

Government of West Bengal Vs. Chatterjee Petrochem (Mauritius) Co. and ...

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: [2008]143CompCas837(Cal)

..... to execute fresh transfer forms the previous ones having become stale was not only highly oppressive to the petitioners in the company petition but also amounted to deliberate misrepresentation of the ..... the board could conclude that the petitioners in the company petition established a case of oppression since with the ioc allotment upheld the chatterjee group would stand converted from the majority .....

Regina Vs. Mushtaq (Appellant) (on Appeal from the Court of Appeal (Cr ...

Court: House of Lords

..... the prosecution proves to the judge beyond reasonable doubt that it was not obtained by oppression or other improper means therefore where the defendant objects to the alleged confession being given ..... considered all the circumstances including any which pointed to the confession having been obtained by oppression or other improper means the jury decided that what the defendant had said was true .....

Ultrafilter Gmbh, Represented by Its Constituted Attorney Vs. Ultrafil ...

Court: Karnataka

..... the required qualification to maintain a petition under section 397 when a majority complains of oppression the majority therefore becomes an artificial minority hence we hold that even though the respondent ..... different cases must depend on the particular facts of each case the circumstances in which oppression may arise being so infinitely various that it is impossible to define them with precision .....

Silica Investors Limited Vs. Tomolugen Holdings Limited and Others

Court: Singapore Supreme Court

..... arbitration clause the agreement to arbitrate should be enforced requiring parties to adjudicate the non oppression aspects of their dispute and to return to court seems unnecessary and inconsistent with ..... applying these considerations to this case there is no doubt that the plaintiff s minority oppression claim against the 2nd defendant is non arbitrable there are relevant parties including other .....

Somashekara Rao, Hiriadka and Another Vs. the Canara Land Investment L ...

Court: Karnataka

..... proportional representation they have not infringed any of the rights of the petitioners nor have oppressed them they have not mismanaged the affairs of the company therefore the petitioners have not ..... respondents hold majority shares such an act could definitely be considered as an act of oppression against the petitioners holding 44 shares 42 therefore the question that arise for consideration is .....

Chatterjee Petrochem Vs. Haldia Petrochemicals Ltd. and

Court: Company Law Board CLB

Reported in: (2008)143CompCas726

..... is not a member of the company it cannot allege oppression as oppression could be alleged only by a member further a careful ..... case mere violation of the statutory provision does not constitute oppression therefore there is no substance in the allegation of the ..... right or not being examined hereinafter petitioners could definitely allege oppression in regard to the allotment to ioc since with the .....

Hillcrest Realty Sdn. Bhd. Vs. Hotel Queen Road Pvt. Ltd. and ors.

Court: Company Law Board CLB

Reported in: (2006)71SCL41

..... company thus this petition appears to be essentially a petition under section 397 relating to oppression 28 this petition has been filed jointly by a shareholder holding redeemable preference shares and ..... an equity shareholder under sections 397 and 398 of the act alleging oppression and mismanagement in the affairs of the company even though the 2nd petitioner contends that .....