https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197487 Allegations of misappropriation were rejected where the disputed sum was shown to have been received in settlement of a land transaction, deposited in the company account, and supported by a memorandum of understanding. The challenge to transfer of 2,170 shares failed because the transfer form bore the petitioner's signature and the transfer had been board-approved; any dispute over non-payment of consideration was treated as a matter between transferor and transferee, not a ground for rectification in company proceedings. The record also did not establish completed removal from directorship, as the required cessation filing was absent, so the petitioner was treated as continuing as a director. Limited relief was granted only for delivery of share certificates for the remaining shares in her name. en-us Mon, 20 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 08 Jan 2018 17:57:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197487 Allegations of misappropriation were rejected where the disputed sum was shown to have been received in settlement of a land transaction, deposited in the company account, and supported by a memorandum of understanding. The challenge to transfer of 2,170 shares failed because the transfer form bore the petitioner's signature and the transfer had been board-approved; any dispute over non-payment of consideration was treated as a matter between transferor and transferee, not a ground for rectification in company proceedings. The record also did not establish completed removal from directorship, as the required cessation filing was absent, so the petitioner was treated as continuing as a director. Limited relief was granted only for delivery of share certificates for the remaining shares in her name. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 20 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197487