47. The object of prescribing a qualifying percentage of shares in petitioners and their supporters to file petitions under Sections 397 and 398 is clearly to ensure that frivolous litigation is not indulged in by persons who have no real stake in the company. However, it is of interest that the English Companies Act contains no such limitation. What is required in these matters is a broad commonsense approach. If the Court is satisfied that the petitioners represent a body   of   shareholders   holding   the   requisite percentage, it can assume that the involvement of the company in litigation is not lightly done and that it should pass orders to bring to an end the matters complained   of   and   not   reject   it   on   a   technical requirement. Substance must take precedence over form. Of course, there are some rules which are vital and go to the root of the matter which cannot be broken. There are others where non­compliance may be condoned or dispensed with. In the latter case, the   rule   is   merely   directory   provided   there   is substantial   compliance   with   the   rules   read   as   a whole and no prejudice is caused. (See Pratap Singh v.  Shri Krishna Gupta, (AIR 1956 SC 140). In our judgment, Section   399(3)   and   Regulation   18   have been substantially complied with in this case.