<?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>1994 (7) TMI 238 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102544</link>
    <description>Section 22A of the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1956 operates as a special regime for listed securities and prevails over inconsistent aspects of section 108 of the Companies Act, 1956. The company&#039;s power under section 22A(3) is a regulated, directory discretion rather than an absolute mandate, requiring good-faith consideration under the statutory procedure. An instrument of transfer bearing uncancelled adhesive stamps is treated as not duly stamped and, in law, as unstamped under the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. Even so, rectification of the register is an equitable remedy and may be refused where the company acted under the statutory process in good faith and the surrounding circumstances, including delay and prejudice, do not justify interference.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 Jul 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Feb 2012 12:47:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=139590" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (7) TMI 238 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102544</link>
      <description>Section 22A of the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1956 operates as a special regime for listed securities and prevails over inconsistent aspects of section 108 of the Companies Act, 1956. The company&#039;s power under section 22A(3) is a regulated, directory discretion rather than an absolute mandate, requiring good-faith consideration under the statutory procedure. An instrument of transfer bearing uncancelled adhesive stamps is treated as not duly stamped and, in law, as unstamped under the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. Even so, rectification of the register is an equitable remedy and may be refused where the company acted under the statutory process in good faith and the surrounding circumstances, including delay and prejudice, do not justify interference.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Jul 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102544</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>