BOARD POWERS TO REFUSE THE TRANSFER OF SECURITIES

-

 BOARD POWERS TO REFUSE THE TRANSFER OF SECURITIES

SHUBHAM BUDHIRAJA[1]



Directors cannot arbitrarily refuse the transfer of shares even when specific power is given by the Articles. The directors stand in fiduciary position and cannot act contrary to collective Interest of the company. The tribunal can test the reasons for refusal/ approval of transfers on ground of arbitrariness.

 

Reese River Silver Mining Co. Ltd.’ V. ‘Smith’ (1869) LR HL 64.

Section 46 of the Companies Act provides that the ‘Register of Members’ is the prima facie evidence of any matters that the Law directs or authorizes to be entered in the Register. Further, the Companies Act treats the ‘Register of Members’ only as prima facie evidence and not the conclusive evidence of the entries therein.

It is to be noted that the power to refuse registration of shares can be exercised by the Directors of the Company if the ‘Articles of Association’ do contain specific powers for such refusal. However, the rider is the reasons for refusal to register the shares must be legitimate, notwithstanding the fact that ‘powers of refusal’ are conferred in the ‘Articles of Association.

If the Directors had assigned reasons for their refusal to register ‘Transfer of Shares’ then, the Tribunal is empowered to evaluate / scrutinize as to whether the said reasons are legitimate and that  where the Directors had committed mistake(s) and in fact, their action(s) can be displaced / set at naught to avoid serious miscarriage of justice.

The discretionary power to refuse ‘Transfer of Shares’ is not to be resorted to in a deliberate, arbitrary, fraudulent, ingenious or capricious fashion. As a matter of fact, the Directors are to exercise their discretion in good faith and to act in the interest of company. The Directors are to give due weightage to shareholder’s right to transfer his share


In every transfer of ‘Shares’ there is a change of owner of shares in all relevant records and it is necessary to complete the formalities relating to ‘Shares Transfer’ without which transfer is incomplete. In the decision ‘Lyle & Scott Ltd.’ (1960) 30 Company cases 30 (HL) the Court held that ‘transferring a share involves series of steps (i) an Agreement to sell (ii) Execution of Deed and transfer and (iii) registration of transfer. ‘Shares’ are ‘Goods’ as defined in ‘Sale of Goods Act’ and can be transferred like any other movable property subject to the provisions contained in the ‘Articles of Association’ and the Companies Act. The word ‘Transfer’ employed in Section 108 of the Companies Act, 1956 Act refers to a transfer between persons pursuant to a voluntary act. Only when the ‘transferee’s’ name is registered in Company’s register, right to property is perfected

 

Kellick Nixon Ltd.’ V. ‘Dhanraj Mills (P) Ltd.’ (1983) 54 Comp cas 432 (Bom).

A company can register the transfer on such terms as to the ‘Indemnity’ as the Board may consider fit. In case of undelivered instruments or lost instruments registration is possible if the ‘Transferee’ agrees to give ‘Indemnity Bond’ or security on such terms as the Board may decide. By getting his name registered in the ‘Register of Members’, the ‘Transferee’ only perfects his title to the shares and is entitled in his own right to claim all the privileges which were previously claimed by the ‘Transferor’ in his name.


‘Colonial Bank’ V. ‘Hepworth’ (1887) 36 ChD 36 at p54

Wherein it is observed that till the transfer of shares is actually registered, the transferee’s title to the share is actually inchoate and the legal title remains vested in the transferor.


 ‘Hindustan Dorr Oliver Ltd.’ V. ‘A.K. Menon’ (1994) 80 Comp cas 384 (Bom)

Wherein it is observed that an owner of shares can follow the shares even into the hands of a bonafide purchaser for value. The term ‘transfer’ is used in regard to inter vivos transfer as per decision ‘Hemendra Prasad Barooah’ V. ‘Bahdur Tea Co. P. Ltd.’ (1991) 70 Comp cas p 792 (Guwahati).


Copal Varnish Co. Ltd.’ In re reported in (1917) Ch.D 349

Till the stage of execution of ‘transfer’ all that is made is to pass an equitable interest in the shares to the ‘Transferee’. In reality, there is no completion of legal assignment. Even when the ‘Board of Directors’ accepts the transfer and passes it for registration of transfers in records, the ‘transfer’ is not completed. Until the actual entry of transferee’s name was affected in the company’s register, the ‘transferor’ remains the legal holder of shares.

 

This work is a result of skills, labour and creativity of author. Therefore all rights are duly reserved with respect to the ownership of this literary work. Further, this work is meant only for academic purpose and therefore same should by no stretch of imagination be accepted or construed as a legal opinion.


[1] Associate Company Secretary & Final year law student from Faculty of Law, University of Delhi

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

REPUGANCY UNDER ARTICLE 254 & TEST OF VALIDATING LAW

-
Image
  Shubham Budhiraja [1] [1] Company Secretary, LLB Final Year,DU & Bcom (H) The land acquisition falls in concurrent list and parliament in year 2013 has introduced a new act which provides for rehabilitation, compensation and procedure on land acquisition of property. The State of T.N has made 3 different state laws w.r.t. land acquisition which was struck off by the High Court. Thereafter, state of TN in year 2019 enacted the same law but with president assent under Article 254 to avoid the repugnancy with 2013 act under Article 254. The appeal filed before apex court w.r.t. repugnancy of 2019 state law with 2013 central law & test of validating the struck off law. The Supreme Court observed as: VALIDATING A LAW WITH RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT Case Law Relevant Remarks National  Agricultural  Cooperative  Marketing  Federation  of India Ltd. & Anr. vs. Union o...
Read more

Whether a person can be appointed as an arbitrator if his daughter is married to the son of the eldest brother of one of the parties in the arbitration proceedings?

-
Image
    Shubham Budhiraja [1] Two brothers running a family business in the form of a company and dispute arise between them and both decide to resolve through arbitration. During course of arbitration proceedings, one of party filed Section 14(2) r/w Section 15 Petition filed challenging mandate of arbitrator as being terminated because son of arbitrator is married to daughter of eldest brother of one of party and thus should be disqualified under Section 12(5) being ‘close family relationship’. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court declined the relief and held that neither the Seventh Schedule of the A&C Act nor the IBA Guidelines define the expression ‘close family relationship’. The plain language of Entry no. 9 indicates that it is not the legislative intent to render a distant relative of the parties to be ineligible for being appointed as an arbitrator, if both the parties so agree. It is not sufficient that the arbitrator is related to any one of the parties; the relation...
Read more

Whether unstamped agreement to sell executed in the year 1988 can be relied upon in suit for possession?

-
Image
  Whether unstamped agreement to sell executed in the year 1988 can be relied upon in suit for possession?   Under what circumstances, photocopy of agreement to sell can be relied upon as secondary evidence?   Shubham Budhiraja [1]   A filed a suit for possession against B on basis of agreement to sell executed in the year 1989. During the hearing, A filed IA for reading photocopy of agreement to sell as secondary evidence because he is not able to find the original agreement to sell. The Trial Court allowed the IA but in review rejected that because agreement to sell was insufficiently stamped therefore bar of section 35 of stamp act applies. The High Court confirmed the order. The Hon’ble Supreme Court held that bar of Section 35 will not apply because amendment of 1990 wherein explanation was added to the stamp act was substantive in nature and therefore new obligation of stamping cannot be imposed on agreement of sell executed between A and B. [2] ...
Read more