https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97625 A company's enforcement of a lien over shares was held ineffective where the directors who authorised the demand and sale had no subsisting authority, and the sale was pursued on an exaggerated and improper claim. Protection for defective appointment and the rule of indoor management did not assist a purchaser who was not bona fide and was fixed with notice of the governing articles. The court further held that a sale by the company still amounted to a transfer within the statutory scheme, so a duly executed transfer instrument and delivery of the share script remained necessary. In the absence of those requirements, registration of the purchaser was unlawful and the share register had to be corrected in the plaintiff's favour. en-us Tue, 04 Mar 1958 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 17 Jan 2012 15:00:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97625 A company's enforcement of a lien over shares was held ineffective where the directors who authorised the demand and sale had no subsisting authority, and the sale was pursued on an exaggerated and improper claim. Protection for defective appointment and the rule of indoor management did not assist a purchaser who was not bona fide and was fixed with notice of the governing articles. The court further held that a sale by the company still amounted to a transfer within the statutory scheme, so a duly executed transfer instrument and delivery of the share script remained necessary. In the absence of those requirements, registration of the purchaser was unlawful and the share register had to be corrected in the plaintiff's favour. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 04 Mar 1958 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97625