<?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>2026 (4) TMI 536 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789467</link>
    <description>A transferee purchaser with approved share transfer rights and recognised financial interest could maintain proceedings under sections 241, 242 and 59 of the Companies Act, 2013, despite objections over the company&#039;s refusal to issue duplicate certificates or execute transfer documents. Notice of the extraordinary general meeting was held valid because it was sent to the liquidator&#039;s official email, and no separate legal requirement existed to serve the secretary of the liquidator. The transferee was also treated as bound by the non-compete obligation under the joint venture framework, since the articles allowed transfer conditions requiring acceptance of the rights and liabilities attached to the shares. Limited relief was granted, while transfer and meeting validity were upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Apr 2026 08:09:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=895911" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (4) TMI 536 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789467</link>
      <description>A transferee purchaser with approved share transfer rights and recognised financial interest could maintain proceedings under sections 241, 242 and 59 of the Companies Act, 2013, despite objections over the company&#039;s refusal to issue duplicate certificates or execute transfer documents. Notice of the extraordinary general meeting was held valid because it was sent to the liquidator&#039;s official email, and no separate legal requirement existed to serve the secretary of the liquidator. The transferee was also treated as bound by the non-compete obligation under the joint venture framework, since the articles allowed transfer conditions requiring acceptance of the rights and liabilities attached to the shares. Limited relief was granted, while transfer and meeting validity were upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789467</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>