https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98291 Shares that devolve by operation of law pass to the successor State without any instrument of transfer, and a company's articles cannot be stretched to refuse registration of such devolution. The distinction between transfer and transmission is material, so a restriction aimed at transfers does not defeat title that has already vested by law. Where the directors delayed registration and refused without a bona fide ground, the refusal was capricious and justified rectification of the share register under section 38. A procedural objection that the request was made in the name of the Secretary rather than the State did not defeat the substantive right to registration. The refusal was therefore ineffective and relief was upheld. en-us Thu, 05 May 1966 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 16 Aug 2014 11:13:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98291 Shares that devolve by operation of law pass to the successor State without any instrument of transfer, and a company's articles cannot be stretched to refuse registration of such devolution. The distinction between transfer and transmission is material, so a restriction aimed at transfers does not defeat title that has already vested by law. Where the directors delayed registration and refused without a bona fide ground, the refusal was capricious and justified rectification of the share register under section 38. A procedural objection that the request was made in the name of the Secretary rather than the State did not defeat the substantive right to registration. The refusal was therefore ineffective and relief was upheld. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 05 May 1966 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98291