- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27679 WP No. 9955 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 9955 OF 2024 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI K N CHANDRAKANTH AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS S/O LATE K NAGANNA R/AT JAIN TEMPLE ROAD CHICKPET TUMKUR - 372 101 … PETITIONER (BY SRI. GURU PRASANNA S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. UNION OF INDIA BY ITS SECRETARY MINISTRY OF CO-OPERATE AFFAIRS 'A' WING, SHASTRI BHAWAN RAJENDRA PRASAD ROAD NEW DELHI - 110 001 2. THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR SOUTHERN REGION MINISTRY OF CORPORATE AFFAIRS 5TH FLOOR, SHASTRI BHAVAN 26 HADDOWS ROAD CHENNAI - 600 006 Digitally signed by PRAKASH N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27679 WP No. 9955 of 2024 3. THE IEPF AUTHORITY MINISTRY OF CORPORATION AFFAIRS GROUND FLOOR JEEVAN VIHAR BUILDING 3, SANSAD MARG NEW DELHI - 110 001 IEPF NODAL OFFICER / REGISTRAR 4. M/S MRF LIMITED A PUBLIC COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO.114 GREAMS ROAD CHENNAI - 600 006 REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. GOWTHAMDEV C ULLAL., ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2; SRI SHANTHI BHUSHAN, DSGI FOR R1 TO R3; SRI JIDESH KUMAR M.D., ADVOCATE FOR R4) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-3 AND 4 TO TRANSFER THE SHARES IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER WITHIN A STIPULATED PERIOD WITH RESPECT TO 74 SHARES OWNED BY LATE SRI KATARI NAGARNNA (HAVING LF NO. 00049) IN TERMS OF THE LEGAL NOTICE DATED 07.02.2024 (ANNEXURE-A) AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR FRESH MATTERS LIST THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV ORAL ORDER The petitioner has sought for issuance of writ of mandamus to respondent nos.3 and 4 to transfer the - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27679 WP No. 9955 of 2024 shares in favour of the petitioner within the stipulated period with respect to 74 shares owned by late Sri.Katari Naganna having L.F.No.00049 in terms of legal notice dated 07.02.2024 vide Annexure-A. 2. The facts made out are that Sri.Katari Naganna, the father of the petitioner was the holder shares belonging to the 4th respondent. After his death, he was succeeded by his legal representatives. It is also a matter of fact that the legal representatives of deceased Katari Naganna had approached the Civil Court in P & SC No.18/2021 which came to be disposed off granting succession certificate to the petitioner and 8 other legal heirs of Katari Naganna with respect to 74 shares of the 4th respondent-Company. 3. It is further submitted that other legal representatives have executed 'Affidavit-cum-No Objection Certificate' in favour of the petitioner. The respondent- Company have informed the petitioner that after necessary process has been made at their end, the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27679 WP No. 9955 of 2024 3rd respondent-IEPF Authority was called upon to take further steps for transition. However, it is submitted that the 3rd respondent has failed to take action for transmission of shares, accordingly the present petition has been filed. 4. It is noticed that, in terms of the Investor Education and Protection Fund Authority (Accounting, Audit, Transfer and Refund) Rules, 2016 ("2016 Rules, for short), procedure is stipulated for transmission of shares. Rule 7 (6) (8) and (10) are of relevance and are extracted below: "7. Refunds to claimants from Fund: ….. (6) An application received for refund of any claim under this rule duly verified by the concerned company shall be disposed of by the Authority within sixty days from the date of receipt of the verification report from the company, complete in all respects and any delay beyond sixty days shall be recorded in writing - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27679 WP No. 9955 of 2024 specifying the reasons for the delay and the same shall be communicated to the claimant in writing or by electronic means. (7) In cases, where the application is incomplete, a communication shall be sent to the claimant by the Authority detailing deficiencies of the application. (8) In case, claimant is a legal heir or successor or administrator or nominee of the registered security holder, he has to ensure that the transmission process is completed by the company before filing any claim with the Authority. (10) The company shall be solely liable under all circumstances whatsoever to indemnity the IEPF Authority in case of any dispute or lawsuit that may be initiated due to any incongruity or inconsistency or disparity in the verification - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27679 WP No. 9955 of 2024 report or otherwise. The IEPF Authority shall not be liable to indemnity the security holder or Company for any liability arising out of any discrepancy in verification report submitted etc., leading to any litigation or complaint arising thereof." 5. The submission of learned counsel for petitioner that Rule 7 would apply even for transmission of shares is to be accepted taking note of the language used in Rule 7 (1). 6. In terms of Rule 7 (6), once the claim form is duly verified by the concerned Company and the same is forwarded to the 3rd respondent authority, the same has to be disposed off within the time limit prescribed i.e., 60 days. Insofar as rightful owners are concerned, the succession certificate issued is evident of the names of the claimants. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27679 WP No. 9955 of 2024 7. The 4th respondent Company in its statement of objections filed has taken the stand that the 3rd respondent has taken a precautionary measure on placing of whole transfer of shares and succession certificate has been issued by the learned Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Tumkur. 8. It must be noticed that the Company itself has forwarded the claim while forwarding the claim in Form IEPF-5, perusal of which reveals that along with the claim form, all the details are furnished including 'No Objection Certificate' from other holders, Indemnity Bond, Surety Affidavit. If that were to be so, there is no warrant for the 3rd respondent refusing to transfer the shares. 9. Taking note of Form IEPF-5, it must be noticed that once the Company itself has forwarded the form to the 3rd respondent, in the event of any claim under Rule 7 (11), the Company would be liable to indemnify IEPF. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27679 WP No. 9955 of 2024 10. Accordingly, the petition is disposed off. Respondent no.3 is directed to pass orders on transmission in light of the observations made above within a period of 30 days from today. Sd/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE NP