1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O. O. C. J. SUIT NO.2107 OF 1998 M/s. Nana FinTrade Services Pvt.Ltd. and another..Plaintiffs. Vs. Gujarat Gas Company Ltd. and Others ..Defendants. .... Ms. Pallavi Divekar with Ms. Londhe i/b Lata S. Desai for the Plaintiffs. None for the Defendants. .... CORAM: DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J. 23rd January, 2008. P.C. : 1. The suit is for a declaration that the Second Defendant is the owner of 500 shares of the First Defendant; for an injunction restraining the First Defendant from transferring 100 shares to Defendants 7 and 8 and from transferring the balance 400 shares in favour of any third party. The case of the Plaintiffs is that in September 1997 the First Plaintiff instructed his agent to sell and purchase certain shares during the period 24th September and 30th September, 1997 from the National Stock Exchange. This order, it is alleged, included the purchase of 500 shares of the First Defendant. It has been stated that the Plaintiffs' agents VNS 2 Finance Capital Services Limited purchased the aforesaid 500 shares on 26th September, 1997 of which the distinctive numbers have been disclosed in the affidavit in lieu of the examination in chief. The full purchase price is stated to have been paid. The Plaintiffs have produced the bill dated 30th September, 1997 and an extract from the ledger account. Delivery of the shares together with the transfer forms duly signed and executed by Defendants 2 to 6 is stated to have been received by the First Plaintiff's agents from the National Stock Exchange (NSE) on 9th October, 1997. The Eleventh Defendant is stated to be incharge of collecting and delivering shares to the First Plaintiff's agents on a daily basis and accordingly he was sent to the office of the agent on 10th October, 1997. In December 1997, the Plaintiffs while taking inventory of the shares are stated to have obtained knowledge of the fact that certain shares were not accounted for including the 500 shares that form the subject matter of the suit. At that stage, the Eleventh Defendant stated that the shares have been lost in transit. A letter dated 29th December, 1997 was addressed to the First Defendant. A letter dated 5th February, 1998 addressed by the First Defendant to the Second Defendant was received by the Plaintiffs at their address, recording that the First Defendant had received transfer 3 deeds executed by the Second Defendant for the transfer of 100 shares. The case of the Plaintiffs is that on a perusal of the transfer deed, it is found that it had been presented by Defendants 7 and 8 and had been traded on the National Stock Exchange. The case of the Plaintiffs is that at no point of time had any authority been given for the sale of the 100 shares. On further enquiries, it is stated that the Plaintiffs obtained knowledge of the fact that the Eleventh Defendant had sold and purchased shares through Defendant No.10 and has instructed Defendant No.10 to sell the 100 shares on 23rd December, 1997. According to the Plaintiffs, Defendant No.11 has stolen the said 100 shares and a police complaint was lodged on 20th March, 1998. The case of the Plaintiffs is that Defendant Nos.7 and 8 have no right, title or interest in the shares which were stolen. Moreover, it has been stated that the Plaintiffs have paid the full purchase price for the 500 shares. On 20th May, 1998 ad interim relief was granted in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b). The ad interim order was confirmed on 17th November, 1999. 2. The Defendants have not entered appearance or filed their written statement despite the service of the writ of summons. 4 The suit has accordingly been listed as an undefended suit for ex parte decree. The Plaintiffs have relied on the affidavit in lieu of examination in chief of the Second Plaintiff and on a compilation of the original documents. On the basis thereof, the claim in the suit has been duly proved. The suit shall accordingly stand decreed in terms of prayer clauses (a) to (c ).