<?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>1920 (3) TMI 1 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279273</link>
    <description>Section 38 confers a broad discretionary power to order rectification of the Register of Members; that discretion extends to questions affecting persons with a direct and substantial interest. A mortgagee holding a specific charge on shares has a proprietary interest in the register as a guarantee to creditors and therefore is entitled to intervene and be heard before any rectification affecting those charged shares. Where the respondent obtained transfer and decree but the appellant held a prior specific charge, the court concluded the respondent&#039;s removal application should not succeed without hearing the mortgagee, and the application was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 17 Mar 1920 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 11 Mar 2019 12:06:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=562340" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1920 (3) TMI 1 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279273</link>
      <description>Section 38 confers a broad discretionary power to order rectification of the Register of Members; that discretion extends to questions affecting persons with a direct and substantial interest. A mortgagee holding a specific charge on shares has a proprietary interest in the register as a guarantee to creditors and therefore is entitled to intervene and be heard before any rectification affecting those charged shares. Where the respondent obtained transfer and decree but the appellant held a prior specific charge, the court concluded the respondent&#039;s removal application should not succeed without hearing the mortgagee, and the application was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Mar 1920 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279273</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>