<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1958 (9) TMI 45 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97610</link>
    <description>Rectification of a company&#039;s register is a discretionary equitable remedy under Section 155 of the Companies Act, 1956, and will not be granted merely because allotments are alleged to exceed authority or involve minors. The court treated long-standing allotments, full payment by allottees, and the company&#039;s own acceptance of the position as factors against disturbing the register. It further noted that a minor is not barred, on that ground alone, from being a transferee or holder of fully paid-up shares, and that the doctrine of indoor management protects persons dealing in good faith. The petition was also rejected on equitable grounds because the applicant had participated in the allotments and later sought to upset an established state of affairs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 24 Sep 1958 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Jan 2012 14:31:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=134667" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1958 (9) TMI 45 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97610</link>
      <description>Rectification of a company&#039;s register is a discretionary equitable remedy under Section 155 of the Companies Act, 1956, and will not be granted merely because allotments are alleged to exceed authority or involve minors. The court treated long-standing allotments, full payment by allottees, and the company&#039;s own acceptance of the position as factors against disturbing the register. It further noted that a minor is not barred, on that ground alone, from being a transferee or holder of fully paid-up shares, and that the doctrine of indoor management protects persons dealing in good faith. The petition was also rejected on equitable grounds because the applicant had participated in the allotments and later sought to upset an established state of affairs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 24 Sep 1958 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97610</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>