Bombay High Court
Francisca SaldanhaversusTHE CUSTODIAN and Ors.
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
- Bench
- N JAMADAR
Holding
The court held that the applicant is a bonafide holder of the shares and allowed the application for certification and transfer.
Summary
The applicant, Mrs. Francisca Saldanha, sought certification and transfer of 25 shares of Apollo Tyres Ltd. that were originally allotted to her and her deceased husband after conversion of debentures. The Custodian had attached the shares, claiming lack of proof of payment and delay in the application. The court examined the original share certificate, a 2004 letter indicating a restraint on transfer, and other contemporaneous documents showing the applicant’s entitlement. It held that independent proof of payment was not required as the shares arose from debenture conversion and the applicant was a bonafide holder. Consequently, the court ordered the Custodian to transfer the shares with all accruals and dividends to the applicant within eight weeks and disposed of the application.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant is entitled to certification and transfer of the shares despite the absence of proof of payment.
- Whether the Custodian's objections regarding delay and lack of supporting documents merit consideration.
- Whether the restraint on transfer/de‑materialisation of the shares can be lifted.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- share certification
- dematerialisation
- debenture conversion
- custodial attachment
- special court
- Apollo Tyres
- bonafide holder
- securities transaction
Judgment
Digitally signed
SWAROOP by SWAROOP
SHARAD
SHARAD PHADKE
PHADKE Date: 2026.06.23
11:54:59 +0530 8 spma 23 of 2025.doc
IN THE SPECIAL COURT
(TRIAL OF OFFENCES RELATING TO TRANSACTIONS
IN SECURITIES) ACT, 1992
MISC. APPLICATION NO.23 OF 2025
Wilfred Lawrence Saldanha (deceased)
and
Mrs. Francisca Saldanha … Applicant
versus
The Custodian and Ors. … Respondents
Ms. Vatsala Toprani, appointed Advocate for Applicant.
Mrs. Francisca Saldanha, Applicant present.
Mr. Gandhar Raikar with Ms. Shilpa Bhate (through VC) with Ms. Payal
Mehta, for Custodian.
Mr. Siddhant Marathe i/by Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas and Co., for
Respondent No.2.
Mr. Ashwin Mehta, for Notified party.
CORAM: N.J.JAMADAR, J.
JUDGE, SPECIAL COURT
DATE : 19 JUNE 2026
P.C.
1. This is an application for certification of 25 shares of Apollo Tyres Ltd.
(R2), having Certificate No.1240572, Distinctive Nos.10132051 to 10132075,
under Folio No.W13004 (the subject shares).
2. The Applicant alongwith her husband Wilfred claimed to have jointly
applied to Apollo Tyres Ltd. (R2) for allotment of debentures and the
transactions were effected through banking channels. Eventually, the ATL
(R2) converted the debentures into the shares. The Applicant and her
SSP 1/4
8 spma 23 of 2025.doc
husband thus acquired total 250 shares of ATL (R2). Wilfred, the husband of
the applicant, passed away on 25 July 2003. Thereupon, the applicant
requested the Company to delete the name of Wilfred from the share
certificate and also de-materialize the shares in the name of the applicant. At
that time, the applicant was informed that the subject 25 shares were tainted.
3. Pursuant to a public notice dated 31 January 2025, published by the
Custodian in pursuance of the directions of this Court in Misc. Application
No.39 of 2018 dated 14 June 2024, the Applicant has preferred this
Application to lift the attachment over the subject shares and to release / pay
all the accruals / accretions and dividend thereon.
4. The Custodian has filed a certification report. It is, inter alia, contended
that the applicant has submitted the original share certificate. The
requirement to produce the documents like, contract note, bill / receipt of
broker and proof of delivery in stock exchange, is not applicable as the
applicant had initially purchased the debentures from ATL (R2), which were
later on converted into the subject shares. However, the non-availability of
the proof of payment was sought to be commented upon. Likewise, the delay
in preferring the application for certification was also arrayed against the
Applicant.
5. As the application was filed by the applicant in person, this Court had
requested Ms. Vatsala Toprani to espouse the cause of the Applicant.
SSP 2/4
8 spma 23 of 2025.doc
6. I have heard Ms. Toprani, learned Counsel for the Applicant, Mr.
Gandhar Raikar, learned Counsel for the Custodian and Mr. Ashwin Mehta,
learned Counsel for the Notified Party.
7. Perused the material on record. The documents placed on record by
the applicant lend support to the claim of the applicant. Subscription to and
allotment of, the debentures and the subsequent allotment of the shares are
evidenced by the contemporaneous documents. The subject shares were
jointly allotted in the name of the Applicant and her deceased husband
Wilfred. It was in the year 2004, ATL (R2) informed the applicant, in response
to the request for transfer of shares that, in respect of the subject shares there
was a restraint on transfer / de-materialization. The letter dated 19 February
2004 evidences the said fact. The said communication substantiates the
claim of the Applicant.
8. In the light of the aforesaid documents, Ms. Toprani would urge, the
objection on behalf of the Custodian regarding the absence of proof of
payment, does not merit consideration.
9. The submission appears well founded. Since the shares were initially
allotted to the applicant upon conversion of the debentures, independent
proof of payment cannot be insisted upon.
10. Mr. Raikar, learned Counsel for the Custodian, fairly submitted that the
documents on record do indicate that the applicant is a bonafide holder of the
SSP 3/4
8 spma 23 of 2025.doc
subject shares.
11. Mr. Mehta, learned Counsel for the Notified Party, also fairly submitted
that, having regard to the small quantity of shares, and, in the facts of the
case, without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the Notified Party to
oppose the prayer for certification in other cases, the Notified Party does not
object to the certification of the shares in this case.
12. As the claim of the applicant finds overwhelming support in the
documents, which appear to be of unimpeachable character, the Application
deserves to be allowed.
13. Hence, the following order :
ORDER
(i) The Misc. Application stands allowed.
(ii) The prayer for certification of 25 shares of Apollo Tyres Ltd. (R2),
having Certificate No.1240572, Distinctive Nos.10132051 to 10132075 under
Folio No.W13004, stands allowed.
(iii) The Custodian (R1) shall take necessary steps to transfer the
subject 25 shares along with all accruals and dividends, as indicated in
paragraph No.10 of the Certification Report, in favour of the Applicant, within
a period of eight weeks from today.
(iv) The Misc. Application stands disposed.
( N.J.JAMADAR, J. )
SSP 4/4
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.