BEDA NAND CHOUDHARY Vs. ITC LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner herein filed this petition against the respondents seeking reliefs to direct respondent No. 1 company to enter the name of the petitioner in the shareholder register in the place of the names of respondent No. 2 to respondent No. 5; to issue relevant share certificates in respect of the said shares; to release dividend and other benefits accrued thereon, be credited and cost thereof.

(2.) RESPONDENT No. 1 company is a listed company. The petitioner is an individual who purchased 700 equity shares of respondent No. 1 company in the year 1997 from a broker, i.e., M/s. Rusody Securities Ltd., who is a leading member of the National Stock Exchange of India. Out of 700 equity shares worth Rs. 10 each, respondent No. 1 company returned 400 equity shares because of bad delivery. Then the petitioner filed a writ petition bearing No. 2098 of 1998 before the Honourable High Court of Calcutta against the National Stock Exchange (respondent No. 3), Rusoday Securities Ltd., (respondent No. 5) and others, wherein ultimately the honourable High Court passed an order directing the Registrar, original side to deliver the shares kept with him to the petitioner (Annexure A1 -5). The petitioner received the said shares from the Registrar of High Court, thereafter approached respondent No. 1 company through a letter dated 12 -9 -2009 (Annexure A6) to transfer the said shares in the name of the petitioner. To which the company replied on 29 -9 -2009 (Annexure A7) to send the certified copy of the court order to enable them to look into the matter to take necessary action in that regard. Then the petitioner sent the true copy of the order through a letter dated 7 -10 -2009 (Annexure A8). As a reply to the same, respondent No. 1 company wrote back (Annexure A9) on 27 -10 -2009, informing that ordinary shares worth Rs. 10 already cancelled as the company's shares were sub -divided into ordinary shares of Re. 1 each on 28 -9 -2005, allotting one bonus share for every two shares held as on 28 -9 -2005; consequently sought fresh transfer deeds duly executed and completed in all respects with old transfer deeds to enable them to do the needful, upon which, the petitioner, having felt aggrieved of it, moved this petition with the reliefs as above said.

(3.) AS to respondent Nos. 2 to 4 are concerned, since respondent Nos. 2 to 4 remained ex parte, respondent No. 1 company having no objection to effect transfer of shares, respondent No. 1 is directed to effect the transfer of those 300 shares to the petitioner and to incorporate the name of the petitioner in place of the names of respondent No. 2 to respondent No. 4.