Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + HC Companies Law - 2012 (12) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2012 (12) TMI 886 - DELHI HIGH COURTRectification of the Register of Members - loss of shares - Held that:- An appeal under Section 10 F of the Companies Act can be filed only on a question of law, a mis-interpretation or mis-reading of document is question of law. There is no dispute that in this case a question of law has arisen as the submission of the appellant is that the correspondences exchanged between the parties were not appreciated by the CLB in its correct perspective. CLB should have returned a finding that no active steps had been taken by respondent No. 1 up to 2009 (when the present petition was filed) and the petition was barred by limitation - Record does not substantiate this submission of the appellant, respondent no. 1 was pursing his case right from the inception and correspondences are prima facie evident of this fact. It is also not the argument of the appellant that respondent No. 1 had not purchased the shares from him, his whole argument is bordered on the issue of limitation, submission being that because of the inordinate delay on the part of respondent No. 1 in taking active steps, the present petition under Section 111 of the Companies Act is liable to be dismissed. Case of the respondent all along has been that he had purchased these shares on 20.05.1992 but they were lost on the same date, accordingly it had been prayed that in the absence of the original documents i.e. share certificates and the share transfer forms a direction be given to the Company to rectify the Share Register entering his name in the list of share holders qua these 100 shares. As noted out of the 200 shares which had formed part of the transaction dated 20.05.1992 Company has already transferred 100 shares in favour of respondent No. 1. Discriminatory attitude of the Company qua respondent No. 1 has been correctly noted by the CLB. In this background, impugned order directing rectification of the Share Register in favour of the respondent No. 1 qua these 100 shares as also for additional bonus shares with a direction to pay the unclaimed dividend to respondent No. 1 calls for no interference.
|