https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101716 Under section 155 of the Companies Act, 1956, the company court could not compel disclosure of reasons for refusing registration of a share transfer because, unlike section 111(5A), it contained no express disclosure power. Where articles of association confer absolute discretion on directors to refuse registration without reasons, judicial interference requires positive evidence that the refusal was mala fide, arbitrary, capricious, oppressive or contrary to the company's interests. Mere allegations or unequal treatment of proposed transferees do not establish abuse of discretion. The refusal was therefore valid, and the rectification applications were dismissed. en-us Fri, 10 Apr 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 10 Feb 2012 17:48:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101716 Under section 155 of the Companies Act, 1956, the company court could not compel disclosure of reasons for refusing registration of a share transfer because, unlike section 111(5A), it contained no express disclosure power. Where articles of association confer absolute discretion on directors to refuse registration without reasons, judicial interference requires positive evidence that the refusal was mala fide, arbitrary, capricious, oppressive or contrary to the company's interests. Mere allegations or unequal treatment of proposed transferees do not establish abuse of discretion. The refusal was therefore valid, and the rectification applications were dismissed. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 10 Apr 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101716