<?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>2001 (2) TMI 923 - HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105342</link>
    <description>Alteration of articles to permit refusal of share-transfer registration and compulsory transfers may be valid when adopted by special resolution under company law. A transfer instrument executed on behalf of the transferor by a director authorised under the articles may comply with the statutory execution requirement. However, compulsory cancellation of a member&#039;s shareholding must be bona fide and demonstrably serve the company&#039;s interests rather than merely benefit particular shareholders. Complaints by the member and her spouse, without evidence of tangible corporate harm, did not establish such benefit. The membership cancellation was therefore illegal, and restoration of the member&#039;s name to the register was maintained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 26 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Mar 2012 13:29:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=142380" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (2) TMI 923 - HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105342</link>
      <description>Alteration of articles to permit refusal of share-transfer registration and compulsory transfers may be valid when adopted by special resolution under company law. A transfer instrument executed on behalf of the transferor by a director authorised under the articles may comply with the statutory execution requirement. However, compulsory cancellation of a member&#039;s shareholding must be bona fide and demonstrably serve the company&#039;s interests rather than merely benefit particular shareholders. Complaints by the member and her spouse, without evidence of tangible corporate harm, did not establish such benefit. The membership cancellation was therefore illegal, and restoration of the member&#039;s name to the register was maintained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 26 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105342</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>