JUDGMENT

Ramly Ali J:

[1] The petitioner (who claimed to be a beneficial shareholder of respondent 1) files a petition (encl. 1) against all the respondents under s. 181 of the Companies Act 1965, in that the affairs of respondent 1 were conducted and the powers of the directors were exercised in a manner which is oppressive; and/or in disregard of his interest; and/or which unfairly discriminates against; and/or is otherwise prejudicial to one or more members of the 1st respondent.

[2] The petitioner further contends that the affairs of the 1st respondent should not be conducted in a manner likely to defeat the legitimate expectations of one or more its members. The petitioner contends that it was always intended that all parties would act in utmost goodfaith and that 1st respondent was formed on the basis of personal relationship involving mutual confidence. The petitioner further contends that the nature of the 1st respondent is one in which there is an understanding that all the shareholders would participate in management and share in the profits of the 1st respondent.

[3] The petitioner also contends that 1st respondent acting through the 2nd, 3rd and 4th respondents has brea