<?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 196 - HIGH COURT OF KERALA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102159</link>
    <description>A share transfer is not enforceable against the company unless the transfer instrument is duly stamped, properly lodged, and any prescribed transfer fee is paid as a condition precedent. An instrument with uncancelled adhesive stamps was treated as not duly stamped, and the fee deficiency could not be cured later. A company may validly alter its articles by special resolution under the statutory power, and the amended article can regulate pending transfer rights where the transfer has not crystallised against the company. On that basis, the board&#039;s discretionary refusal to register transfers under the amended article was upheld, and the refusal to register the transfers was sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 Nov 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2012 18:08:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=139208" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1991 (11) TMI 196 - HIGH COURT OF KERALA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102159</link>
      <description>A share transfer is not enforceable against the company unless the transfer instrument is duly stamped, properly lodged, and any prescribed transfer fee is paid as a condition precedent. An instrument with uncancelled adhesive stamps was treated as not duly stamped, and the fee deficiency could not be cured later. A company may validly alter its articles by special resolution under the statutory power, and the amended article can regulate pending transfer rights where the transfer has not crystallised against the company. On that basis, the board&#039;s discretionary refusal to register transfers under the amended article was upheld, and the refusal to register the transfers was sustained.</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=102159</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>