<?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 (11) TMI 195 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102155</link>
    <description>Share-transfer restrictions must be expressly contained in a private company&#039;s articles of association or arise by necessary implication; they are construed strictly in favour of free transferability. The articles bound the company and members and regulated share transfers, but restricted transfers only on a member&#039;s death and admission of heirs or nominees. A private family agreement added pre-emption and family-branch restrictions on transfers by living members, contrary to the articles. Those additional restrictions were not binding on the company, shareholders or transferees, and a transfer complying with the articles was not invalid merely because it breached the private agreement.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 Nov 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 Oct 2025 19:45:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=139204" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1991 (11) TMI 195 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102155</link>
      <description>Share-transfer restrictions must be expressly contained in a private company&#039;s articles of association or arise by necessary implication; they are construed strictly in favour of free transferability. The articles bound the company and members and regulated share transfers, but restricted transfers only on a member&#039;s death and admission of heirs or nominees. A private family agreement added pre-emption and family-branch restrictions on transfers by living members, contrary to the articles. Those additional restrictions were not binding on the company, shareholders or transferees, and a transfer complying with the articles was not invalid merely because it breached the private agreement.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Nov 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102155</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>