https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101733 An order directing the receiver to obtain duplicate shares was reviewed because it proceeded on a mistaken premise that the shares were lost. Although the shares had earlier been sold and legal title remained in the judgment-debtor's name due to non-registration, beneficial interest had passed to the purchaser and the company could treat the registered holder as owner in its records. The court held that this constituted a patent error apparent on the record, so the direction for duplicate shares was deleted. Once that direction was removed, the contempt petition had no surviving and was dismissed with costs. en-us Mon, 02 Nov 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 10 Feb 2012 18:09:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101733 An order directing the receiver to obtain duplicate shares was reviewed because it proceeded on a mistaken premise that the shares were lost. Although the shares had earlier been sold and legal title remained in the judgment-debtor's name due to non-registration, beneficial interest had passed to the purchaser and the company could treat the registered holder as owner in its records. The court held that this constituted a patent error apparent on the record, so the direction for duplicate shares was deleted. Once that direction was removed, the contempt petition had no surviving and was dismissed with costs. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 02 Nov 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101733