https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96692 Court refused to order rectification of the company register under Section 38 because the company's articles validly require proof of succession; Articles 41 and 42 operate as standard transmission clauses giving the company a contractual basis to insist on probate, letters of administration or a succession certificate, and Article 42 confers a discretionary, non-compellable power on directors. Where directors bona fide apply those article-based requirements and no fraud or mala fides is alleged, refusal to register is not 'without sufficient cause' and rectification will not be ordered. en-us Fri, 02 Aug 1935 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 10 Jan 2012 13:15:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96692 Court refused to order rectification of the company register under Section 38 because the company's articles validly require proof of succession; Articles 41 and 42 operate as standard transmission clauses giving the company a contractual basis to insist on probate, letters of administration or a succession certificate, and Article 42 confers a discretionary, non-compellable power on directors. Where directors bona fide apply those article-based requirements and no fraud or mala fides is alleged, refusal to register is not 'without sufficient cause' and rectification will not be ordered. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 02 Aug 1935 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96692