<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1991 (1) TMI 348 - HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102012</link>
    <description>Transfer of shares under the Companies Act, 1956 is distinct from transmission by operation of law on a member&#039;s death, and the executor, as legal representative under the Indian Succession Act, is entitled to have the deceased&#039;s shares entered in the register unless the articles specifically bar such transmission. Articles dealing only with voluntary transfers between living persons cannot justify refusal of registration of transmitted shares. An improper refusal to register transmission amounts to a default or omission in maintaining the register, so rectification under section 155 is maintainable. The company&#039;s refusal was unlawful and the register had to be corrected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2012 13:40:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=139061" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1991 (1) TMI 348 - HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102012</link>
      <description>Transfer of shares under the Companies Act, 1956 is distinct from transmission by operation of law on a member&#039;s death, and the executor, as legal representative under the Indian Succession Act, is entitled to have the deceased&#039;s shares entered in the register unless the articles specifically bar such transmission. Articles dealing only with voluntary transfers between living persons cannot justify refusal of registration of transmitted shares. An improper refusal to register transmission amounts to a default or omission in maintaining the register, so rectification under section 155 is maintainable. The company&#039;s refusal was unlawful and the register had to be corrected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102012</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>