Investors in Barclays today staged a dramatic rebellion against its £6 billion capital raising plan with almost a quarter of the bank's owners refusing to endorse the terms of the controversial deal.

Although Barclays won sufficient support to press ahead with its fund-raising, the refusal by 22 per cent of the bank's shareholders to back it deals a big blow to Marcus Agius, the chairman, and John Varley, chief executive.

Both men faced calls to resign today at a packed emergency meeting to vote on the bank's capital plan.

This afternoon, Barclays told the stock market that 584,125,704 votes had been cast against the bank's resolution to increase its share capital, while a further 528,965,914 votes were withheld as investors obstained.

Earlier, Marcus Agius, the bank's chairman, had told a packed emergency meeting in London, that an analysis of proxy voting by institutional shareholders indicated that the fundraising had been approved.

However, that did not stop private and institutional shareholders, including the director of corporate governance at F&C Asset Management, lining up to vent to their displeasure.

No fewer that 21 questions were asked at the meeting, with regular applause resounding through the Excel Conference centre in East London in response to the harshest critics.

George Dallas, the director of corporate governance at F&C Asset Management, said he would be voting the fund manager's 57 million shares in favour of the capital raising.

"I would hasten to add, however, that we think that it amounts to a clear and egregious abuse of pre-emption rights," he said. "We object that the consequences of voting against this particular transaction would make a bad situation worse."

Such was the feeling in the hall that Mr Agius was eventually forced to end questioning. One irate investor who felt that he had been denied the opportunity to speak thrust himself to the front of the conference hall and had to be restrained by security.

Shareholders, initially led by Legal & General and Aviva, were angry at being denied access to Barclays' fundraising, which offered preferential terms to two new Middle Eastern investors, Qatar Holdings and Sheikh Mansour Bin Zayed al-Nahyan, a member of the Saudi Royal Family.

Between them, the two investors could end up owning just over 30 per cent of Barclays, in exchange for injecting £5.5 billion. Barclays has waived bonuses for all of its directors this year and put its entire board up for re-election next April as a sop to win over angry shareholders.

At the meeting, with an estimated 500 investors in attendance, shareholders complained that they had little alternative but to back the fundraising or risk "dire consequences" for the bank if they didn't.

Individual investors called on Barclays to limit directors' pay deals at £250,000 a year and cancel executive share options. They berated the board for cancelling the annual dividend, in breach of a commitment made in the summer.

"Shame on you," said Eric Chalker, who has 1,800 Barclays shares.

Trevor White, who has been a Barclays shareholder since 1962, said he had lost £200,000 on his investment within the past 12 months. He said he had written to both Mr Varley and Mr Agius demanding their resignations.

Tessa Mayhew, with 9,000 Barclays shares, told Times Online she would be voting against the capital-raising. She said the deal was "highly unattractive" and was an abuse of shareholders' rights.

A hugely contrite Mr Agius expressed Barclays "deep regret" over the fundraising, which he admitted rode a coach and horses through investors' rights.

He said taking the "devil's route" and shutting out the bank's long-term owners had put Barclays in an "exquisitely awkward position".

He acknowledged the anger felt by Barclays investors over the way the deal had been handled. He said that market conditions were so dire that the bank's entire future could have been put at risk if it had pressed too hard for pre-emption rights to be respected.

"A dangerous leak that we were struggling to find money on the right terms could have been terminal," he said.

"We fully recognise that some of our shareholders are unhappy about aspects of our capital raising."

Afterwards, Derek Norcup, who has 7,000 Barclays shares, said he had arrived with an open mind but had eventually decided to vote against. He said the cancelling of the dividend, particularly when Mr Varley had hailed the bank's profitability, was the final straw.

Times Recommends

• Minister in talks with Saudis to protect creditors
• Premier Inn hits back in £29-a-room row
• Bankers hit back at 'populist' bonus supertax