TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) whether the directors' refusal to register the transfer of shares was shown to be mala fide or otherwise an improper exercise of the discretion conferred by the articles of association; (ii) whether the transfer deed, being insufficiently stamped, could validly be accepted for registration and whether any consequential injunction relief was available.
Issue (i): whether the directors' refusal to register the transfer of shares was shown to be mala fide or otherwise an improper exercise of the discretion conferred by the articles of association.
Analysis: The articles vested the directors with an absolute and uncontrolled discretion to refuse registration, subject to the legal requirement that the power be exercised bona fide in the interests of the company. The court held that it would not sit in appeal over the directors' decision once bona fide exercise of discretion was shown. The unused draft letter, the alleged prior transactions involving other transferees, and the supposed influence of one director did not establish fraud, dishonesty, or bad faith. The evidence failed to show that the board's decision was taken on an improper footing or that the directors acted for a purpose foreign to the company's interests.
Conclusion: The refusal to register the transfer was not proved to be mala fide, and the challenge on that ground failed against the appellant.
Issue (ii): whether the transfer deed, being insufficiently stamped, could validly be accepted for registration and whether any consequential injunction relief was available.
Analysis: The governing statutory scheme required a transfer instrument to be duly stamped and executed before the company could lawfully register it. The deed in question was not duly stamped when presented, and the later cheque or supposed arrangement did not satisfy the statutory requirement. The court also held that the requested injunction against the transferor could not be granted in the absence of proper pleadings showing invasion or threatened invasion of the plaintiff's rights within the statutory conditions for perpetual injunction.
Conclusion: The company was justified in refusing registration on account of the unstamped transfer deed, and no injunction relief was warranted.
Final Conclusion: The appeal failed in substance, the plaintiff was not entitled to have the transfer registered, and the dismissal of the suit was affirmed with costs.
Ratio Decidendi: A company's directors exercising a contractual power to refuse share transfer must act bona fide in the company's interests, but a transfer instrument that is not duly stamped as required by law cannot be lawfully registered.
TaxTMI 
