9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (10) TMI 690X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inctive Nos. 559001 to 559050 and 559051 to 559100, respectively, in favour of the applicants, for the reasons set out therein, in support of which Shri L. Palanimuthu, learned Counsel submitted that on submission of the original share certificates together with the transfer forms to the company for effecting the transfer in favour of the applicants, the company had returned the transfer forms in February, 2002, without any proper justification. The applicants filed a civil suit before the District Munsif Court, Thanjavur, challenging the company's action, as advised in the matter. However, the plaint was returned by the civil court for approaching the competent forum under the Act. By this process, there was a delay of 1,884 days in ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pondent-company returned the transfer forms by order dated February 12, 2002 and subsequent thereto, I sent registered notice to the second and third respondents and only thereafter I was advised to file a suit before the civil court praying for a declaration that the order is bad and illegal. However, the said suit was returned by the learned District Munsif, Thanjavur, directing to approach the appropriate authority under the provisions of the Companies Act within a month. On taking of the return, immediately I contacted my counsel and I was advised to approach the Company Law Board at Chennai. Immediately, I contacted a counsel at Chennai, and filed the above petition on April 11, 2007. In this course, a delay of 1,884 days had occurred ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sed as late as on September 21, 2006, by the applicants on refusal of the company to register the transfer of shares does not also give any reason for not enforcing their rights in respect of the impugned shares all these years. The applicants claim that the civil court returned the plaint directing them to approach the appropriate authority under the provisions of the Act, within a month. But there is no copy of any such order passed by the court of the District Munsif, Thanjavur, and the applicants have not even furnished the suit number sustaining the action initiated by them, but at the same time, the applicants have made an application, under Section 111A of the Act, only on April 11, 2007, which ultimately resulted in a delay of 1,884 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
