KAMLESH KALIDAS SHAH Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA
LAWS(NCLT)-2017-11-38
NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL
Decided on November 04,2017

Kamlesh Kalidas Shah Appellant
VERSUS
STATE BANK OF INDIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

M K Shrawat, Member - (1.) This Petition was filed before the then CLB in the month of March 2015 by invoking the provisions of section 58(4) of Companies Act 2013 for transfer of shares claimed to have been purchased by the Petitioner.
(2.) Facts in brief as stated in the Petition were that the Petitioner is in the business of share brokerage as a share broker. The Petitioner had purchased 200 shares of State Bank of India (Respondent No.l) through Ahmedabad Stock Exchange of 50 denomination each from the following persons:- (i) 50 Shares From Rukhmaniben Babulal { Folio No. SB25412954 ) Certificate no. 1634923 Dist. No. 333094801 To 333094850 and' (ii) 50 Shares from Urvi B. Shah Share Certificate No. 1643232 ( Folio No. SB 2549950 } Dist. No. 333510251 to 333510300 and; (iii) 50 Shars from Mr. Jolly Champaklal Shah, Share certificate No. 871509 ( Folio No. SB 1797766 ) Distt. No. 294924101 to 294924150 and; (iv) 50 Shares from Mr. Kamlesh Bhuderji Thakker, Certificate No. 386109 ( Folio No. SB 1329225, Distt. No. 270654101 to 270654150."
(3.) The above listed shares of State Bank of India totalling 200 in number, claimed to have been purchased through Ahmedabad Stock Exchange. The Petitioner had made an attempt to get some shares transferred in his name, however, due to mismatch of signatures the Bank had refused to transfer those shares and put "Stop mark". We shall discuss the merits and facts of the case but before that a legal question has been raised that this Petition is not maintainable against the State Bank of India being not incorporated as a Company under the provisions of the Companies Act. This legal question is to be answered first, because of the reason that the Respondent No.l i.e. State Bank of India, had vehemently opposed the maintainability of this Petition. From the side of the Bank, Learned Representatives were present time to time and pleaded to dismiss this Petition because no cause of action had arisen under the facts against the Bank being not a Company as defined under the Companies Act.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.