A Dive Into The Guarding Wall Of Minority Shareholders Rights
- IJLLR Journal
- 2 days ago
- 1 min read
Laksh Manuja, B.Com. LL.B. (Hons.), Jindal Global Law School, O.P. Jindal Global University
ABSTRACT
This article explores the legislative regime of oppression and mismanagement under Sections 241 and 242 of the Companies Act, 2013. It places these provisions against the background of the larger tension between majority rule and the preservation of minority shareholders. By following the development from the original principles of Foss v. Harbottle, which promoted internal resolution of company conflicts and restricted judicial intervention, to Indian case law that validates exceptions where there is a resultant injustice, the analysis highlights the subtle parameters necessary for maintaining an oppression claim. By examining landmark cases like Shanti Prasad Jain v. Kalinga Tubes Ltd. and Needle Industries, the article points out that the courts evaluate not individual acts but the aggregate conduct, intention, and outcome for the minority stakeholders. Finally, the article contends that these sections represent a remedial, as opposed to penal, measure to ensure corporate fairness and accountability. As company structures become more complicated, these provisions remain an important tool to safeguard minority rights without destroying legitimate managerial flexibility.
