AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (5) TMI 100
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er herein seeking directions to respondents Nos. 1 and 2 to transfer the share certificate from its first registered holder to the petitioner and further to allot bonus shares and all other benefits in favour of the petitioner. Averments 2. The facts apropos to the petition in brief are : (1) Shri R. Muralidhar, father of the petitioner herein purchased 100 shares of M/s. Heritage Foods Ltd., bearing Distinctive Nos. 9012501 to 9012600 by paying full sale consideration through M/s. Target Investment/ share broker from its first registered joint holders Mona Goyal and Deepak Goyal, residing at Rohtak, Haryana/respondent No. 3. (2) The petitioner's father being ignorant of the procedure, kept the shares with him as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on February 1, 2015 after a lapse of 20 years and further stated that the petitioner has not provided any reasons or documents as to why the petitioner's father has not filed the petition but the same is filed by the petitioner (son). (2) It is the case of respondent No. 1 that upon verification it was found that there was a signature mismatch of the original transferor (i. e., respondent No. 3) and that as requested by respondent No. 2 the petitioner has not complied with the bank attestation of the signatures of respondent No. 3 on the transfer deed, attested copy of PAN card and address proof of transferor. (3) Respondent No. 1 relied on section 108(e) of the Companies Act, 1956 read with section 56 of the Companies....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... 3. (4) Further it is contended that the petitioner complied with section 108(1) of the Companies Act, 1956 and section 56 of the Companies Act, 2013. Hence, prayed to this Tribunal to allow the petition. Discussion 6. We have heard counsel for the petitioner. This is a petition filed under section 58 of the Companies Act, 2013 seeking direction to respondents Nos. 1 and 2 to transfer share certificate No. 48631, Folio No. HFL 009890 and Distinctive Nos. 9012501 to 9012600 comprising 100 shares, which were purchased from respondents Nos. 3 and 4, Mona Goyal and Deepak Goyal in the name of the petitioner and also to allot bonus shares and other benefits in favour of the petitioner. We have heard counsel for the petit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... seeking for transfer of shares in the name of the petitioner soon after purchase of shares by the father of the petitioner. Learned counsel contended that first respondent directed petitioner to obtain other documents from the transferor in view of the fact the signature of transferor is mismatched. Learned counsel contended that whereabouts of the transferors are not known and notice issued to the address available were not served and transfer of shares may be effected subject to any of the conditions imposed on the petitioner. 13. The case of the petitioner is that his father purchased the shares about 20 years ago but shares were not transferred in the name of father and now petitioner filed petition for direction for transfer of sha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....petitioner has relied on the decision of the Company Law Board, Eastern Region Bench, Kolkata, in the matter of SMC Global Securities Ltd. v. ITC Ltd. reported in [2007] 135 Comp Cas 313 (CLB). Similarly, counsel for the petitioner further relied on the decision of the Company Law Board, Southern Region Bench, Chennai, in the matter of Altina Securities P. Ltd. v. Satyam Computer Services Ltd. reported in [2007] 135 Comp Cas 464 (CLB). 16. We have gone through the decision cited. In the case before the Company Law Board, Eastern Region Bench, Kolkata cited above, the facts are similar to the facts of the case. "The company declined the request for registration of transfer of the impugned 100 shares on the ground that the signature of the....