9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (2) TMI 326X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s 391 and 394 of the Companies Act, it is necessary to execute a further instrument of transfer as contemplated by section 108 of the said Act? Held that:- Appeal dismissed. The questions raised in the appeal have been rendered academic having regard of the fact that the appellant-company has since registered the shares in question in the name of the respondent No. 1-company. - CIVIL APPEAL NO ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rein for registration on 12-11-2001. The appellant-company refused to register the said shares on 9-1-2002 and intimated the advocate for the respondent No. 2 of its said decision. 2. On 16-5-2002, the shares were again lodged for registration on behalf of the respondent No. 1-Poddar Projects Limited, but once again the appellant-company refused to register the same. 3. Such refusal led to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r registration was itself defective and could not, therefore, be acted upon. It was further submitted that till such time as the shares were not registered in favour of the respondent No. 1 company, the same could not be registered in the name of the subsequent transferee, namely, the respondent No. 2 herein. Certain other objections were also taken regarding cancellation of stamps and the fact th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bmitted that during the pendency of the appeal, the appellant-company had complied with the direction of the Calcutta High Court and had registered the original shares in the name of the respondent No. 1-company. Since the respondent No. 2 had not preferred any appeal against the order of the Company Law Board, the same became final as far as the respondent No. 2 is concerned. Although, on behalf ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellant-company, the questions raised in the appeal have been rendered academic having regard of the fact that the appellant-company has since registered the shares in question in the name of the respondent No. 1-company. 7. The appeal is, therefore, disposed of as having become infructuous and the questions raised therein are left open for decision in an appropriate case. 8. There w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
