https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100658 The court held that the petitioners complied with Section 108 of the Companies Act by submitting duly executed share transfer forms and a composite share certificate, satisfying the requirements despite the certificate containing more shares. The company's refusal to register the transfers due to the lack of sub-division of the share certificate was deemed unjustified as there was no legal prohibition against applying for transfer with a larger certificate. The court also ruled that the absence of witness signatures and original share applications did not invalidate the transfer forms. Consequently, the court directed the company to register the petitioners' names for the respective shares, granting costs to the petitioners. en-us Thu, 03 Feb 1983 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 03 Feb 2012 17:35:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100658 The court held that the petitioners complied with Section 108 of the Companies Act by submitting duly executed share transfer forms and a composite share certificate, satisfying the requirements despite the certificate containing more shares. The company's refusal to register the transfers due to the lack of sub-division of the share certificate was deemed unjustified as there was no legal prohibition against applying for transfer with a larger certificate. The court also ruled that the absence of witness signatures and original share applications did not invalidate the transfer forms. Consequently, the court directed the company to register the petitioners' names for the respective shares, granting costs to the petitioners. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 03 Feb 1983 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100658