Shaikh Farhana Haque -Versus- Mr. Shaikh Ehsanul Haque and others

Read the full judgment on the Supreme Court website ↗

Case information

The case-reference year is not the judgment year. The court website upload date is not a judgment date.

Official index description

Source: Supreme Court official index.

Section 43 of the Companies Act 1994 i. The jurisdiction to rectify the register is not confined merely to correcting clerical or accidental errors. Where an entry in the register is alleged to have been made without a valid corporate act or on the basis of a transaction which did not confer a lawful title to the shares, the Court may examine the underlying transaction for the purpose of determining whether the impugned entry ought to remain on the register. ii. The contention of Respondent No.1 that the petitioner waived her pre-emption rights or acquiesced in the allotment also cannot assist him unless the underlying allotment is first shown to have been lawfully made. Acquiescence cannot, by itself, validate an allotment which was not authorised in accordance with law. Nor can an entry made in the Company`s records or subsequently recorded by the Registrar become immune from scrutiny merely because it has remained on record for some period.

View this listing on the official Supreme Court index ↗