https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109309 Attached dematerialised shares were not released because the applicants failed to prove a bona fide and valid beneficial ownership. The High Court noted that no contract notes, proof of consideration or other independent material established completed transactions, and the shares remained reflected in the judgment debtor's demat accounts; the explanation of client holdings or transfers was found unsupported. It also confirmed that an objection to attachment was maintainable under Order 21 Rule 58 CPC, since the executing court may decide claims involving right, title and interest. The attachment was therefore upheld, subject only to the limited clarification recorded for one joint demat account. en-us Mon, 08 Dec 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 07 Apr 2012 17:53:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109309 Attached dematerialised shares were not released because the applicants failed to prove a bona fide and valid beneficial ownership. The High Court noted that no contract notes, proof of consideration or other independent material established completed transactions, and the shares remained reflected in the judgment debtor's demat accounts; the explanation of client holdings or transfers was found unsupported. It also confirmed that an objection to attachment was maintainable under Order 21 Rule 58 CPC, since the executing court may decide claims involving right, title and interest. The attachment was therefore upheld, subject only to the limited clarification recorded for one joint demat account. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 08 Dec 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109309