Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + AT Companies Law - 2018 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (9) TMI 207 - AT - Companies LawSuspicious transaction - Held that:- Appellant makes out a case that he has not transferred/sold the shares to anyone, therefore, he has right on his shares and also the bonus shares issued and the dividend declared during the past years. He needs to execute indemnity bond in favour of 1st Respondent, in case later on any other claimant comes forward and proves his title. It is admittedly on record that the 3rd respondent was appointed as Registrar & Transfer Agent of 1st Respondent on 1. 3. 2010 and his services were terminated on 11. 6. 2016 by 1st respondent. It is admitted by the 1st respondent that 3rd respondent has done the suspicious transaction and these suspicious transaction has taken place during the period the services of 3rd respondent were being utilised. Therefore, the 1st respondent, who had appointed 3rd respondent as its Registrar and Transfer Agent, is liable for the suspicious transaction which have been committed by 3rd respondent. 1st respondent should protect the shareholder and should take action against the 3rd respondent and its officials for their wrong doings due to which the 1st respondent has been put to loss. 1st respondent cannot escape the responsibility saying that the other person has done misconduct so the shareholder may suffer. Appeal is allowed
|