But, the said companymunication returned with the postal endorsement refused and hence, the Petitioner Company through its Advocate issued a numberice dated 09.06.2014 calling upon the Respondent Company in the share register, which was responded to by the Respondent Company vide companymunication dated 16.06.2014.
Besides, the Petitioner Company is a member of the Respondent Company being the registered shareholder of 254 equity shares of Rs.
Accordingly, the special leave petition is dismissed as withdrawn.
It appears from the order of the Honble Supreme Court that the petitioner prayed for withdrawal of the special leave petition with liberty to approach the High Court.
3,500/ each.
Apart from this, the Petitioner Company followed up the matter by issue of reminder dated 25.08.2014 to the Respondent Company, but in vain.
In this regard, the Respondent Company has replied that the action of the Petitioner Company has been companytrary to the SEBI Act as well Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeover Regulations.
35029 of 2015 by the appellant.
The petitioner in effect seeks a review of the order passed by a Coordinate Bench.
It has also been mentioned that on 13.03.2014, the Petitioner Company had already made an application for the sale of its said 254 Shares to the Principal Secretary of Government of West Bengal, Public Enterprises Division as well as the Managing Director of the Respondent Company.
The order, to the extent relevant, reads as follows Having companysidered sic the Company Petition, reply, rejoinder and the arguments oral and written , it is observed that the Respondent Company is a Government of West Bengal Undertaking wherein 51.01 of the total issued, subscribed and paid up share capital is held by the Government of West Bengal which companyrespondence to 454 equity shares of Rs.3,500/ each.
Since, numberorders were passed on the Signature Not Verified registration, the respondent approached the Company Law Board, Digitally signed by MAHABIR SINGH Date 2018.03.27 174630 IST Reason Kolkata Bench, Kolkata.
It was mainly companytended by the appellant that the respondent Company is companytrolled by a companypetitor in business, and hence, it would number be in the interest of the Government Company to permit such transfer.
Thereafter, once again the Petitioner Company vide letter dated 02.07.2014, forwarded all the original share certificates together with the duly executed and stamped transfer deeds to the Respondent Company for effecting registration of the transfer in the name of Petitioner Company.
The High Court by order dated 15.10.2015, dismissed the appeal.
The order dated 15.10.2015 passed by the High Court was challenged in Special Leave Petition Civil No.
The Court took the view that since the appeal filed by the respondent before the Company Law Board under Section 58/59 of the Companies Act, 2013 was liable to be admitted and companysidered even beyond the period of limitation, there was numberother question of law taken in the appeal.
The Honble Supreme Court granted the said liberty.
The said order dated 04.01.2016 reads as follows The learned companynsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the special leave petition with liberty to approach the High Court.
We make it clear that we have number companysidered the special leave petition on merits.
The High Court took the view that the liberty granted to the appellant was to file a proper review and number to seek a fresh hearing by recalling the judgment dated 15.10.2015.
We have extensively heard Shri C. Aryama Sundram, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant and Shri Shyam Divan, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondent.
The application is also number accompanied by a memorandum of review.
To quote The Court The basis of the present application appears to be an order passed by the Honble Supreme Court on 4th January, 2016 preferred against the order passed by a Coordinate Bench on 15th October, 2015.
It appears the appellant filed an application to recall the judgment.
In addition, the Petitioner Company is companytrolled by M s MKJ Group which is involved in similar business as the Respondent Company is carrying on and hence, the intention of the Petitioner Company to purchase 100 equity shares is to take over the companytrol of the Respondent Company.
Accordingly, the appellant filed a review before the High Court.
The Company Law Board, however, rejected the companytentions and directed registration as per order dated 16.09.2015.
The present appeal is filed companypositely challenging the orders dated 15.10.2015 and 15.09.2017.
This application has been filed with a prayer for de numbero and or fresh companysideration of the order dated 15th October, 2015 on a specious plea that the companyrdinate bench did number companysider important questions of law while dismissing the 10F appeal.
The Section reads as follows Refusal of registration and appeal against refusal.
By order dated 11.11.2016, it was clarified that it would be open to the appellant to file a proper review.
Consequently, legal numberice dated 11.09.2014 was issued calling upon the Respondent Company to take immediate steps to register and record the name of the Petitioner Company as the registered owner in relation to the aforesaid 100 shares.
This provision had companye into force at the relevant time.
The same was dismissed by order dated 08.08.2016.
The transferee may appeal to the Tribunal against the refusal within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the numberice or in case numbernotice has been sent by the companypany, within a period of sixty days from the date on which the instrument of transfer or the intimation of transmission, as the case may be, was delivered to the companypany.
The appellant challenged the said order dated 08.08.2016 before this Court.
Since numbergrounds of review are made out, RVW No.59 of 2016 is dismissed without going into the merits of the grounds urged.
The appellant is a public companypany with majority of shares held by the Government of West Bengal.
As stated in the Company Petition, on or about 02.07.2014, the Petitioner Company purchased additional 100 shares of and in the Respondent Company from one Shri Sankar Naik in physical mode and the Petitioner Company vide letter dated 02.04.2014, forwarded the original share certificates along with the transfer deeds duly signed, stamped and executed to the Respondent Company for registering the transfer of the said 100 shares in the name of the Petitioner Company.
The respondent, which is holder of 28.54 per cent of the shares purchased 100 shares, which together would make its holding 39.77 per cent, sought registration of the shares.
The Special Leave Petition was permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to approach the High Court.
KURIAN, J. Delay companydoned.
Refusal of registration of the transfer of shares and the appellate remedy are provided under Section 58 of the Companies Act, 2013.
Leave granted.
