https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278586 The High Court set aside the Company Law Board's order and remanded the case for fresh consideration within six months. The Court clarified the scope of appeals under Section 10F, upheld the maintainability of a composite application under Sections 111 and 397, and stressed the need for compliance with procedural requirements for rectification of the register of members. The Court highlighted the burden of proof on parties regarding share transfers, the necessity of evidence in legal proceedings, and the importance of equitable considerations in such matters. The Court directed the CLB to re-examine the case based on statutory provisions and observations provided in the order. en-us Tue, 23 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 13 Feb 2019 11:51:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278586 The High Court set aside the Company Law Board's order and remanded the case for fresh consideration within six months. The Court clarified the scope of appeals under Section 10F, upheld the maintainability of a composite application under Sections 111 and 397, and stressed the need for compliance with procedural requirements for rectification of the register of members. The Court highlighted the burden of proof on parties regarding share transfers, the necessity of evidence in legal proceedings, and the importance of equitable considerations in such matters. The Court directed the CLB to re-examine the case based on statutory provisions and observations provided in the order. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 23 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278586