Forgot password
New User/ Regiser
⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2006 (5) TMI 185 - SUPREME COURT
9% NPCL Tax-Free bonds - whether SCB or CMF is the owner of such bonds and entitled to be registered as such?
Held that:- Whatever might have been the conjectures on the part of the Special Court, whatever might have been the suspicion generated on account of sham entries made by one or the other party, when it came to the crux of the issue, the Special Court has correctly answered it and negatived the case of CMF that SCB lost title of the suit bonds because the suit bonds were sold in consideration of purchase of Cantriple Units.
The evidence on record proves that HPD became the owner of the suit bonds or that CMF legitimately acquired the suit bonds from HPD or any other person by paying bona fide purchase value for them. Consequently, we must hold that CMF acquired no right whatsoever, to the suit bonds. The suit bonds always remained the property of SCB irrespective of how they found their way into the hands of CMF.
Thus allow both the appeals and set aside the impugned judgments of the Special Court in Special Court Suit and hold that SCB as the owner of the suit bonds is entitled to be registered as such in the register of NPCL.