<?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>1990 (8) TMI 408 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199316</link>
    <description>Share transfer instruments were treated as valid where proper duty had been paid and adhesive stamps had been cancelled in a manner preventing reuse; objections based only on technical form were rejected, though uncancelled stamps remained a defect. The notice, explanatory statement and alteration of the articles for the extraordinary general meeting were regarded as sufficiently disclosed and not shown to be mala fide. A later article could regulate future transfers but could not retrospectively defeat applications already lodged under the earlier articles. Refusal to register transfers had to rest on valid, relevant and bona fide grounds, and reasons based on incorrect, irrelevant or collateral considerations were insufficient.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 27 Aug 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 26 Feb 2018 13:06:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=510534" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1990 (8) TMI 408 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199316</link>
      <description>Share transfer instruments were treated as valid where proper duty had been paid and adhesive stamps had been cancelled in a manner preventing reuse; objections based only on technical form were rejected, though uncancelled stamps remained a defect. The notice, explanatory statement and alteration of the articles for the extraordinary general meeting were regarded as sufficiently disclosed and not shown to be mala fide. A later article could regulate future transfers but could not retrospectively defeat applications already lodged under the earlier articles. Refusal to register transfers had to rest on valid, relevant and bona fide grounds, and reasons based on incorrect, irrelevant or collateral considerations were insufficient.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 Aug 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199316</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>