<?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>2011 (2) TMI 1265 - HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=213389</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the petitions seeking rectification of the register of members of a public limited company, where the petitioners claimed ownership of shares allegedly transferred to them but were declared illegal and void by the Board of Directors due to identified irregularities. The court upheld the company&#039;s inherent power to rectify mistakes in its register without a court order, emphasizing the resolution&#039;s basis on the company&#039;s acknowledgment of the error rather than solely on the respondents&#039; complaints. The court declined to address the underlying dispute of share ownership, advising the petitioners to seek legal recourse if necessary.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 09 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 20 May 2012 10:39:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=186790" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (2) TMI 1265 - HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=213389</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the petitions seeking rectification of the register of members of a public limited company, where the petitioners claimed ownership of shares allegedly transferred to them but were declared illegal and void by the Board of Directors due to identified irregularities. The court upheld the company&#039;s inherent power to rectify mistakes in its register without a court order, emphasizing the resolution&#039;s basis on the company&#039;s acknowledgment of the error rather than solely on the respondents&#039; complaints. The court declined to address the underlying dispute of share ownership, advising the petitioners to seek legal recourse if necessary.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=213389</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>