These appeals by special leave arise from the judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh, made on November 14, 1996 in RFA Nos.230 and 231 of 1985.
The second respondent, B.K. Malhan, had held 2230 ordinary shares and 64 preferential shares.
The admitted position is that the respondents, Mrs. Surjeet Malhan and Mr. B.K. Malhan, wife and husband respectively, laid two suits for declaration and permanent and mandatory injunction.
Thereafter, the disputes arose between them.
We have heard learned companynsel on both sides.
Leave granted.
In companysequence, the suits came to be laid by the respondents against the appellants.
The principal companytention raised by Shri P.N. Lekhi, learned senior companynsel for the appellant, is that Mrs. Malhan had admitted in her evidence that her husband had delivered her shares to Bhagat and that she never objected to the transfer and that, therefore, there was an implied companysent for the transfer of her shares in favour of Bhagat.
But on appeal, the Division Bench has decreed the suits.
Thus, these appeals by special leave.
