SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1995 Supreme(Ker) 183

P.SHANMUGAM, M.M.PAREED PILLAY, P.A.MOHAMMAD
Antony – Appellant
Versus
Thandiyode Plantations (Pvt. ) Ltd. – Respondent


Judgment :-

Pareed Pillay, C.J.

Company Petition was filed under S.155 of the Companies Act, 1956 (for short 'the Act') to rectify the Registrar of shares of the first respondent-Company and to include petitioner's name as the joint holder of the shares registered in the names of respondents 2 and 3 and for consequential orders. Case of the petitioner is that he and respondents 2 and 3 had entered into an agreement in November, 1973 to acquire all the shares of the Company and that respondents 2 and 3 in violation of the agreement acquired the shares and got it registered in their own names. The Company Court dismissed the petition holding that petitioner has no case that he had applied to the Company for registration in the manner specified by the statute as transferee of its shares and that in the proceedings under S.155 of the Act the direction regarding registration of a transfer cannot be granted overlooking the statutory prescriptions regarding the mode of transfer. The learned judge also observed that the agreement set up by the petitioner itself is in dispute in O.S.No. 245 of 1976 and the matter is pending in appeal before the District Court. The learned judge further held
























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top