Ref. 1995 Supp. (4) Supreme Court Cases 590
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 27 February 2010
This query is : Resolved
Please from where I can download the Judgement of the Honable Supreme Court under Ref. 1995 Supp. (4) Supreme Court Cases 590 Shripal Jain v/s Torrent Pharmaceuticals Ltd and Others.
If anybody having this judgement pls mail me. to "pchatterjee5@rediffmail.com"
Thnaks/P.Chatterjee
Sanjeev Panda
(Expert) 27 February 2010
I could not get the judgment but I can give you the ratio of the said judgment. In the case of Shripal Jain v. Torrent Pharmaceuticals Ltd. and Ors. 1995 Supp (4) Supreme Court Cases 590, it was held that for issuance of duplicate certificates on account of loss of original ones, the proper forum to grant such relief under section 84(4) of the Companies Act, 1956 is not the civil court but the Registrar of Companies.
In the Shripal Jain (supra, the Apex Court observed:
"2. The share certificates purchased by the appellant in respect of M/s. Torrent Pharmaceuticals Ltd., were stolen. The appellant approached the Registrar, Respondent No. 2 in the appeal herein, for issue of duplicate certificates. The Registrar directed the appellant to have a direction in this respect from the civil court. The civil court rejected the application of the appellant. The High Court dismissed the civil revision filed by the appellant in limine.
3. We are of the view that the Registrar of the Company was in patent error in referring the appellant to the civil court in the facts and circumstances of the present case. He should have himself held an enquiry into the matter under Section 84(4) of the Companies Act read with the Companies (Issue of Share Certificates) Rules, 1960 and take a decision himself in the matter.
4. We, therefore, set aside the impugned order of the civil court and consequent order of the High Court and remand the case back to the Registrar, Respondent No. 2 to decide the matter in accordance with law in the first instance. The appeal is disposed of. No costs."
Thus, in view from the aforesaid observations in Shripal Jain's case, it cannot be said that the Application under section 84(4) under Companies Act, 1956 could be maintained before the company Court by invoking section 2(11) read with section 10 of the Companies Act.
H. S. Thukral
(Expert) 28 February 2010
Judgment has been posted to pchatterjee5@rediffmail.com
Kumar Thadhani
(Expert) 03 March 2010
YES mr Panda has given you brief of your judgement.
