https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103661 Refusal to register transfer of shares was not deficient in service where the shares were under attachment by the Income-tax Department, because a company may decline registration on a valid legal impediment. The separate dispute over whether the shares were purchased, whether consideration was paid, and whether the alleged seller had title was not proved and depended on issues of title and payment involving unimpleaded owners. That controversy was held to be fit for determination by a civil court, not as consumer deficiency. No deficiency in service was established against the broker or other opposite party, and the consumer complaint was found not maintainable on the proved facts. en-us Tue, 28 Apr 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 18 Feb 2013 16:30:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103661 Refusal to register transfer of shares was not deficient in service where the shares were under attachment by the Income-tax Department, because a company may decline registration on a valid legal impediment. The separate dispute over whether the shares were purchased, whether consideration was paid, and whether the alleged seller had title was not proved and depended on issues of title and payment involving unimpleaded owners. That controversy was held to be fit for determination by a civil court, not as consumer deficiency. No deficiency in service was established against the broker or other opposite party, and the consumer complaint was found not maintainable on the proved facts. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 28 Apr 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103661