Tribunal orders share transmission to heirs, condemns delays. Legal heirs to receive benefits promptly.

The Tribunal confirmed late Mr. Santanu Mondal's shareholding in the company and directed the transmission of his shares to his legal heirs, the wife and daughter, who had submitted all necessary documents. The Respondents' unjustified delays were deemed oppressive, leading to the Tribunal ordering the transmission of shares within two weeks and granting the Petitioners equal shareholder benefits from a specified date. The judgment emphasizes adherence to legal procedures in share transmission and consequences of arbitrary actions by company directors.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Whether late Mr. Santanu Mondal was the shareholder of 5,000 equity shares in Respondent No. 1 Company.
2. Whether the Petitioners filed requisite documents as per law to prove they are legal heirs of Mr. Mondal to claim transmission of his shares.
3. Whether the Respondents are justified in delaying the transmission of shares, forcing the Petitioners to approach the Tribunal.
4. Whether the Respondents' refusal to transmit shares amounts to acts of oppression.

Detailed Analysis:

Issue 1: Shareholding of Late Mr. Santanu Mondal
- The Tribunal confirmed that late Mr. Santanu Mondal held 5,000 equity shares in Respondent No. 1 Company and died intestate. It was undisputed that he was a shareholder and that his shares were to be transmitted to his legal heirs.

Issue 2: Legal Heirs and Requisite Documents
- The Petitioners, being the wife and daughter of Mr. Mondal, provided necessary documents such as an affidavit, death certificate, and application for transmission of shares. The Tribunal noted that the Petitioners had submitted all requisite documents needed for the transmission of shares.

Issue 3: Justification of Respondents' Actions
- The Tribunal observed that the Respondents had not denied the Petitioners' identity and legal authority but had raised untenable objections to delay the transmission. The Tribunal found that the Respondents' actions were arbitrary and unjustified, forcing the Petitioners to seek Tribunal intervention.

Issue 4: Acts of Oppression
- The Tribunal concluded that the Respondents' refusal to transmit the shares and forcing the Petitioners to approach the Tribunal amounted to oppression. The Petitioners were deemed to be shareholders from May 1, 2017, as they had submitted all required documents by April 1, 2017.

Conclusion and Directions:
- The Tribunal directed Respondent No. 1 to effect the transmission of shares in favor of the Petitioners and rectify the Register of Members within two weeks.
- The Petitioners were entitled to all consequential benefits on par with other shareholders from May 1, 2017.
- The Tribunal dismissed the objections raised by the Respondents and did not award any costs.

This judgment underscores the importance of adhering to legal procedures for transmission of shares and the consequences of arbitrary refusal by company directors.

---