Tajinder Singh Bhathal Vs MRF Limited (NCLAT Chennai)
NCLAT Chennai held that a right to judicial remedies is a right which is safeguarded by Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Thus, deprival of remedies available under Article 21 is unjustifiable and hence it is directed to revive back the company petition.
Facts- In the year 1987, Late Shri. Iqbal Singh Bhathal is said to have purchased 100 equity shares of MRF limited having a face value of Rs.10/- each in the name of his son, the Appellant Shri. Tejinder Singh Bhathal and Late Smt. Satwant Kaur Bhathal, mother of the Appellant.
The Appellant contends that he was not aware of the investments thus made by his father in his name but however he was made conscious of the aforesaid transaction/purchase of the shares only when on 16.10.2018, he was called upon for the purposes of collecting the information, as to whether he happens to be the holder of 100 equity shares of MRF company, since they have been transferred to the Investor Education and Protection Fund (IEPF).
Notably, MRF denied to issue the Duplicate Share Certificates to the Appellant. Thus, the Appellant filed a First Information Report for loss/theft of the said 100 shares and besides the registration of the FIR, he has also written to the MRF for intimation, enclosing therewith the copy of the FIR and praying for, necessary guidance on the appropriate procedure to be adopted, for the purposes of issuance of the Duplicate Share Certificate.
