https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99298 Summary jurisdiction under section 155 of the Companies Act, 1956 is not suited to resolving serious disputes over title to shares where the petition alleges fraud, forgery, impersonation and falsification of records. Where the genuineness of a transfer and the underlying facts are hotly contested, the court should not order rectification on affidavit evidence alone; such controversies require oral and documentary proof tested by cross-examination. Non-production of the transfer deed does not justify an adverse inference unless there is a legal duty or court direction to produce it. Rectification was therefore not appropriate on the material then before the court, and the dispute had to be tried on evidence. en-us Tue, 28 May 1974 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 25 Jan 2012 18:15:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99298 Summary jurisdiction under section 155 of the Companies Act, 1956 is not suited to resolving serious disputes over title to shares where the petition alleges fraud, forgery, impersonation and falsification of records. Where the genuineness of a transfer and the underlying facts are hotly contested, the court should not order rectification on affidavit evidence alone; such controversies require oral and documentary proof tested by cross-examination. Non-production of the transfer deed does not justify an adverse inference unless there is a legal duty or court direction to produce it. Rectification was therefore not appropriate on the material then before the court, and the dispute had to be tried on evidence. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 28 May 1974 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99298