TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1977 (9) TMI 85
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....llotment of shares, a requisite number of shares have been allotted to them. It is not in dispute that the respondent-company, which is incorporated in January, 1971, was converted into a public limited company in January, 1973, and applications for shares by means of prospectus were invited from the members of the public. So far as Petition No. 18 of 1975 is concerned, it is filed by one Rajnikant Ratilal Shah. The averment made therein is that by the letter dated 26th April, 1974, the company purported to issue a letter of allotment in respect of 1,100 equity shares of the company to the petitioner. It is not in dispute that the petitioner had applied for 1,100 equity shares of Rs. 10 each in or about October, 1973, and along with the sai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the company on 10th October, 1974, pointing out that the company had knowingly and recklessly made false statements in the prospectus with a view to mislead the public, that it had agreed to allot on par or cash to the promoters, directors, their friends, relatives and associates 74,310 shares when in fact a large holding out of these 74,310 shares had not been allotted or obtained by the directors, promoters, their friends, relatives and associates. The petitioner, Rajnikant, also pointed out that the allotment of shares was made in contravention of the provisions of section 73 of the Companies Act, permission of the Stock Exchange not having been obtained within the period stipulated by the said section and the company was, therefore, lia....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lief as claimed in the petition cannot be entertained. He has denied that no board meeting was held on 7th April, 1974, or that no return of allotment was filed with the Registrar of Companies. According to him, as the subsequent meeting was held in May, 1974, at the Blue Diamond Hotel, Pune, the minutes of the meeting of 7th April, 1974, were confirmed and the petitioner was, therefore, a member of the company which is now in liquidation. Five directors, who had appeared at the hearing, supported the claim of the petitioners. The official liquidator who was asked to make a report has now reported that the amounts alleged to have been paid by the petitioners do find a place in the ledger of the company for the period from October 1, 1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... by Mr. Rele that the only relevant provision under which he could ask for any relief in this petition was section 155 of the Companies Act. The only relevant part of section 155 is sub-section (1) which reads as under: "155. (1) If- (a)the name of any person- (i)is without sufficient cause, entered in the register of members of a company, or, (ii)after having been entered in the register, is, without sufficient cause, omitted therefrom ; or (b)default is made, or unnecessary delay takes place, in entering on the register the fact of any person having become, or ceased to be, a member; the person aggrieved, or any member of the company or the company, may apply to the court for rectification of the register." Section 15....