Sale Deeds Must Be Interpreted Literally When the Language is Clear and Unambiguous: Supreme Court    |     Non-Signatory Can Be Bound by Arbitration Clause Based on Conduct and Involvement: Supreme Court    |     Right to Passport is a Fundamental Right, Denial Without Justification Violates Article 21: Allahabad High Court    |     Insurance Company's Liability Remains Despite Policy Cancellation Due to Dishonored Cheque: Calcutta High Court    |     Deductions Under Sections 36(1)(vii) and 36(1)(viia) of the Income Tax Act Are Independent and Cannot Be Curtailed: Bombay High Court    |     Diary Entries Cannot Alone Implicate the Accused Without Corroborative Evidence: Supreme Court Upholds Discharge of Accused in Corruption Case    |     MACT | Fraud Vitiates All Judicial Acts, Even Without Specific Review Powers: Rajasthan High Court    |     Right of Private Defense Cannot Be Weighed in Golden Scales: Madhya Pradesh High Court Acquits Appellant in Culpable Homicide Case    |     If Two Reasonable Conclusions Are Possible, Acquittal Should Not Be Disturbed: Supreme Court    |     Kalelkar Award Explicitly Provides Holiday Benefits for Temporary Employees, Not Subject to Government Circulars: Supreme Court Upholds Holiday and Overtime Pay    |     NDPS | Homogeneous Mixing of Bulk Drugs Essential for Valid Sampling Under NDPS Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court    |     Pre-Arrest Bail Not a Right but an Exception: Himachal High Court Denied Bail In Dowry Death Case"    |     POCSO | Scholar Register Is Sufficient to Determine Victim’s Age in POCSO Cases: Madhya Pradesh High Court    |     Abuse of Official Position in Appointments: Prima Facie Case for Criminal Misconduct: Delhi High Court Upholds Framing of Charges Against Swati Maliwal in DCW Corruption Case    |     Service Law | Similarly Situated Employees Cannot Be Denied Equal Treatment: PH High Court Orders Regularization    |     Presumption of Innocence Remains Supreme Unless Clearly Overturned: PH High Court Affirming Acquittal    |     Any Physical Liaison with A Girl Of Less Than Eighteen Years Is A Strict Offense.: Patna High Court Reiterates Strict Stance On Sexual Offences Against Minors    |     Orissa High Court Rules Res Judicata Inapplicable When Multiple Appeals Arise from Same Judgment    |     Mandatory Section 80 Notice Cannot Be Bypassed Lightly:  Jammu & Kashmir High Court Returns Plaint for Non-Compliance    |     Bombay High Court Denies Permanent Lecturer Appointment for Failing to Meet UGC Eligibility Criteria at Time of Appointment    |     Deferred Cross-Examination Gave Time for Witness Tampering, Undermining Fair Trial: Allahabad High Court    |     Dowry Death | Presumption Under Section 113-B Not Applicable as No Proof of Cruelty Soon Before Death : Supreme Court    |     Gift Deed Voided as Son Fails to Care for Elderly Mother, Karnataka High Court Asserts ‘Implied Duty’ in Property Transfers    |     Denial of a legible 164 statement is a denial of a fair trial guaranteed by the Constitution of India: Kerala High Court    |     Safety Shoes Used as Weapon Meets Mens Rea Requirement for Murder: Rajasthan HC on Bail Denial    |     Fraud on the Courts Cannot Be Tolerated: Supreme Court Ordered CBI Investigation Against Advocate    |     Land Acquisition | Jaiprakash Associates Ltd. (JAL) Liable for Compensation under Supplementary Award, Not Ultra-Tech Cement Ltd.: Supreme Court    |     Non-Mentioning of Bail Orders in Detention Reflects Clear Non-Application of Mind: J&K High Court Quashes Preventive Detention Order    |     Conviction Under Arms Act and Criminal Conspiracy Quashed Due to Non-Seizure of Key Evidence and Failure to Prove Ownership of Box: Jharkhand High Court    |     Prima Facie Proof of Valid Marriage Required Before Awarding Maintenance Under Section 125 Cr.P.C: Calcutta High Court Sets Aside Interim Maintenance Order    |    

Property In Shares Does Not Pass Until Payment Is Made: Delhi HC Grants Interim Injunction In Share Transfer Dispute

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling on the transfer of equity shares under dispute, the Delhi High Court has granted an interim injunction favoring the plaintiff in a case involving alleged non-payment of consideration for share transfer. Justice Prateek Jalan observed, “Property in shares does not pass until payment is made,” underscoring the centrality of payment in the transfer of title.

The suit, filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, centers on a dispute where the plaintiff sought a declaration that a Letter Agreement dated December 3, 2018, for the sale of 1,611 equity shares was void due to non-payment. Additionally, the plaintiff sought to restrain the defendants from transferring or creating any third-party rights over the disputed shares.

The plaintiff alleged that despite transferring the shares to defendant No. 1 under the said agreement, the agreed consideration was never received, thus nullifying the transfer of ownership as per the agreement. The plaintiff also submitted that the share transfer form [Form SH-4] executed was contingent on the receipt of payment, which did not occur.

Defendant No. 1 contested the claim, suggesting that the consideration had been settled through alternative means, including use of property and cash, which were not directly traceable to the share purchase. They argued that these transactions formed part of a broader commercial relationship between the parties.

The court scrutinized various legal points concerning the Sale of Goods Act, 1930. Key issues addressed included whether property in the disputed shares passed to defendant No. 1 without payment and whether the payment terms were intended to be of the essence in the contract.

Justice Jalan highlighted clauses from the Sale of Goods Act which state that property does not pass until conditions under the contract are fulfilled, notably the payment of consideration. The court noted inconsistencies in defendant No. 1’s statements regarding the payment, undermining their credibility and lending weight to the plaintiff’s claim of non-payment.

Decision The court granted an interim injunction against defendant No. 1, preventing any transfer or creation of third-party rights in the disputed shares pending the final resolution of the case. The judgment emphasized that allowing such actions would cause irreparable loss to the plaintiff.

Date of Decision : April 30, 2024.

Bhavik Koladia vs. Ashneer Grover & Anr.

 

Similar News