Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + AT Companies Law - 2018 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (12) TMI 511 - AT - Companies LawOppression of mismanagement - rightful holder of shares - divorce between husband and wife - 200 shares of 1st respondent were transferred from the name of the appellant, on the basis of transfer document executed by the appellant and on the basis of family settlement dated 29th June, 2000 - as alleged family members of the appellant’s in laws have not only transferred her 200 shares from the name of the appellant in the name of 3rd respondent but dishonestly and fraudulently transferred a substantial part of land owned by 1st respondent to defeat the claim of appellant over the said property being the holder of 20% shares Held that:- Shares have been transferred without valid instrument and no attempt has been made to get the transfer deed signed from the appellant. It also shows that due diligence has not been done. To participate/attend the meeting of a company is the prerogative of the shareholder. However, the company (here 1st respondent) is duty bound to send notice of every meeting to the shareholder, therefore, the appellant had a right to receive notice of each and every meeting while she was reflected as shareholder in the company records. Admittedly at last till 2013 even as per Respondents, Appellant was shareholder till 2013, but even till then No notice sent is shown. As established that the shares in the name of appellant have been transferred in the name of 3rd respondent, therefore, the impugned order dated 14.11.2017 passed by the NCLT, Ahmedabad is set aside and the appellant is found to be rightful holder of 200 shares and the shares transferred in the name of 3rd respondent are held illegal. Further we direct the 1st respondent to rectify the register so as to restore the appellant as holder of 200 shares in the 1st respondent company. We set aside the impugned order dated 14.11.2017 of the Tribunal and hold that the appellant is rightful holder of 200 shares. As we hold that the appellant is holder of 200 shares (20% of the capital at that time), it is in the fitness of things that the Tribunal decides the other issues raised for which in Impugned Order Points 6 to 8 were framed, on merits. Therefore, the matter is remanded back to the NCLT to decide the other issues raised by the appellant in Company Petition. The parties are directed to appear before the National Company Law Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, Ahmedabad on 1st November, 2018.
|