Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Isolate acts of oppression will not normally be sufficient to justify relief under the section: the words used in the section, "the affairs of the company are conducted in a manner oppressive ..." suggest prima facie a continuing process; but they are wide enough to cover oppression by anyone who is taking part in the conduct of the affairs of the company whether de facto or de jure. It is not essential that the alleged oppressor is oppressing in order to obtain a financial benefit; conduct maybe oppressive under the section even if it is due simply to the controlling shareholder's overwhelming desire for power and control. An act of omission might amount to oppressive conduct if it is shown that it was designed to achieve some unfair advantage over those claiming to be oppressed. Allegations of unwise, inefficient and careless conduct against a, director in the performance of his duties cannot in themselves give rise to any claim for relief under the section, and a petition limited to such allegations will be dismissed in limine."