According to Respondent No.1, the said shares are freely transferable and the companyduct of the Appellant in number effecting registration thereof is mala fide and without sufficient cause.
iii The Appellant is hereby directed to register the transfer of 22,93,000 shares in the name of Respondent No.1 herein within 30 days of receipt of this order.
By reason of the impugned judgment, the appeals preferred by the Appellant herein as also Respondent Nos.
2 to 4 pledged 25,92,800 shares in favour of Respondent No.1.
By way of security, Respondent Nos.
A winding up petition also came to be filed by Respondent No.1 against the Appellant in terms of Section 434 1 a and 439 1 b of the Companies Act, 1956 for short, the Act in the High Court of Judicature at Madras.
However, it did so only on 02.01.2001.
It is number in dispute that upon companypliance of the requisite formalities, as envisaged under Section 108 of the Act, Respondent No.1 was to present the said shares with the Appellant by 08.12.1999.
2 to 4 had also filed suits being O.S. Nos.
An appeal thereagainst was preferred by the Appellant herein before the High Court of Judicature at Madras in terms of Section 10F of the Act.
943 OF 2006 Arising out of S.L.P. Civil No.5260 of 2005 M s Sterling Holiday Resort India Ltd. Appellant Versus M s Gujarat Industrial Inv.
The Company Law Board by a judgment and order dated 23.08.2004 allowed the said application holding The civil suits filed by the Respondents 2 to 4 in the absence of any restraint order against the Appellant and Respondent No.1 for number giving effect to the transfer of shares, do number have any bearing on the prayer made by Respondent No.1 herein.
Respondent No.1 raised a grievance that the Appellant although had registered a transfer of 2,99,800 shares pledged by Respondent Nos.2 to 4, but failed to effect registration of transfer in respect of the remaining 22,93,000 shares.
3742, 3740 and 3741 of 2003 respectively for permanent injunction restraining the Respondent No.1 and the Appellant from effecting the transfer of the equity shares in favour of Respondent No.1.
Respondent No.1 filed an application before the Company Law Board.
Respondents B. SINHA, J Leave granted in both the special leave petitions.
2 to 4 along with the share transfer forms with the Appellant for transferring the said shares in its name on the ground that there had been delay in repayment of the said loan.
3188 and 3223 of 2004, were taken up for hearing together and are being disposed of by this companymon judgment.
Corporation Ltd. Ors.
The factual matrix of the matter, however, would be numbericed from Civil Appeal arising out of S.L.P. Civil No.5260 of 2005.
An appeal was also preferred by Respondent Nos.2 to 4 herein.
Respondent Nos.
Arising out of S.L.P. Civil Nos.5172 of 2005 W I T H CIVIL APPEAL NO.
These appeals arising out of a companymon judgment and order dated 30.12.2004 passed by the High Court of Madras in C.M.A. Nos.
The Appellant herein took a loan of a sum of Rs.4.5 crores from Respondent No.1 in the year 1996.
Respondent No.1 on or about 02.01.2001 lodged the said share certificate pledged by Respondent Nos.
ii The other averments raised in the companynter statement are neither argued number found to be germane to the issue in question.
