9911796707
TMI Blog1991 (2) TMI 416X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... th respect to the said shares, 2200 in number, in favor of any other person. (2) In effect, what the plaintiffs seek is the remedy which is postulated by section 155 of the Companies Act for rectification of shares. (3) The Companies Act, 1956 provides in its section 155 as under:- 155.(1) If-(a) the name of any person-(i) is without sufficient cause, entered in the register of members of a company; or(iiJ after having been entered in the register, is, without sufficient cause, omitted there from; or(b) default is made, or unnecessary delay takes place, in entering on the register the fact of any person having become, or ceased to be, a member; the person aggrieved, or any member of the company, or the company, may apply to the Court fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Companies Act, the Court, meaning the Company Judge dealing with a section 155 petition, is enabled to determine any question relating to title of any person who is a. party to the application, to have his name entered in or omitted from register of members. (5) By virtue of the provisions of Rule 6 of the Companies(Court) Rules'. 1959. framed by the Supreme Court, the practice and procedure of the Court, and the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure apply to proceedings taken under the Companies Act Rule 6 of the Companies(Court) Rules reads as under:- 6.Practice and Procedure of the Court and provisions of the Code to apply.--Save as provided by the Act or by these rules the practice and procedure of the court and the provis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cognizance of a suit of the kind which has been filed by the plaintiffs , is barred m view of the principle enunciated in Nazir Ahmad's case, and reiterated by the Supreme Court- (8) It K contended by Mr. P. C. Khanr.a that the instant suit is maintainable, as it raises some complicated questions of title to the said shares, and according to him, inasmuch as the suit raises complicated questions of title the same could not be dealt with under section 155 of the Companies Act. Mr. Khanna refers to a judgment of Division Bench of this Court in 2nd(1972) I Del 431(The Punjab Distilling Industries Ltd. v. Biermans Paper Coating Mills Ltd. & another) to support his contention. In my view, however, that judgment does not help the contention ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... quires a thing -to be done in a particular way, if must be done in that manner, or not at all. Every other method is forbidden. This proposition laid down by the Privy Council in a criminal case; has not been held to be confined to only criminal matters by the Supreme Court, which has followed this proposition in a large number of cases, both criminal and noncriminal".(See Rao Shiv Bahadur Singh and another v. State of Vindh-P. 1954CriLJ910 ; Ballabhdas Agarwala v. J. C. Chakravarty 1960CriLJ752 ; State of Uttar Pradesh v Singhara Singh & others. [1964]4SCR485 : Gujarat Electricity Board v. Girdharlal Motilal and others [1969]1SCR589 ; and Ramchandra Keshav Adike [dead] by L. Rs. v. Govind Joti Chavare & others). In fact in 1975 Suprem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ase, and reiterated by the Supreme Court in the cases referred to above, keeping in view the fact that the powers of the Company Judge to try and dispose of the matters, are co-extensive with that of the civil court in view of Rule 6 of the Companies(Court) Rules, it would not be right for the civil court to entertain matters which relate to rectification of register of members, or which involve determination of title to shares- in companies., when specifically under the provisions of section 155(3)(a), questions(if title can be determined by Company Court. (14) Mr. Khanna also refers and relies upon judgment of single Judges of this Court, reported as 1983 Comp Case 301(Anil Gupta v. Delhi Cloth and General Mills Co. Ltd.). In that case. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rther jurisdiction to decide the question of title even when it arises between. members or alleged members, or between members or alleged members on the one hand and the company on the other. Sub-clause(b) of sub-section(3) further widens the jurisdiction of the court under section 155 when it permits or enables the court generally to decide any question which it is necessary or expedient to decide in connection with the application for rectification. (16) The Hon'ble Single Judge noted the conflict between the Gujarat. High Court and a Division Bench of this Court in Punjab Distilling Industries case(supra). (17) As I have noted above, that case was- a proceeding under section 155, and in that case, the Division Bench did not conside ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
