<?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>1993 (3) TMI 375 - COMPANY LAW BOARD EASTERN REGION BENCH, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200019</link>
    <description>The petition seeking an extension of time for delivering debenture certificates under Section 113(1) of the Companies Act, 1956 was deemed not maintainable. The court clarified that Section 113(1) pertains to debenture certificates, not letters of allotment, emphasizing timely delivery of certificates to protect investors. The proviso under Section 113(1) does not apply to letters of allotment. The company was not entitled to the relief sought, with the judgment highlighting alternative remedies available to investors for delays in transfer registration. The miscellaneous application for time enlargement was also disposed of in the judgment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 30 Mar 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 17 Mar 2018 15:03:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=513208" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1993 (3) TMI 375 - COMPANY LAW BOARD EASTERN REGION BENCH, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200019</link>
      <description>The petition seeking an extension of time for delivering debenture certificates under Section 113(1) of the Companies Act, 1956 was deemed not maintainable. The court clarified that Section 113(1) pertains to debenture certificates, not letters of allotment, emphasizing timely delivery of certificates to protect investors. The proviso under Section 113(1) does not apply to letters of allotment. The company was not entitled to the relief sought, with the judgment highlighting alternative remedies available to investors for delays in transfer registration. The miscellaneous application for time enlargement was also disposed of in the judgment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 30 Mar 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200019</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>