Just a moment...
We've upgraded AI Search on TaxTMI with two powerful modes:
1. Basic
• Quick overview summary answering your query with references
• Category-wise results to explore all relevant documents on TaxTMI
2. Advanced
• Includes everything in Basic
• Detailed report covering:
- Overview Summary
- Governing Provisions [Acts, Notifications, Circulars]
- Relevant Case Laws
- Tariff / Classification / HSN
- Expert views from TaxTMI
- Practical Guidance with immediate steps and dispute strategy
• Also highlights how each document is relevant to your query, helping you quickly understand key insights without reading the full text.
Help Us Improve - by giving the rating with each AI Result:
Powered by Weblekha - Building Scalable Websites
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the assignment of decrees by the company's manager, effected without express sanction of the Board of Directors, was valid and binding on the judgment-debtors and could be enforced by the assignee.
Analysis: The Articles of Association authorised a manager to conduct the company's banking business and, by delegation, to sign and transfer instruments where such transfers were sanctioned by the Board. The limitation on directors' powers does not prevent a banking company from selling decrees obtained in the ordinary course of its business. Acts done by managers or directors within their apparent authority, even if irregular or lacking internal sanction, bind the company as against third parties acting bona fide. Section 109 of the Indian Companies Act, 1913, limits borrowing procedure but does not prohibit sales falling within ordinary business. Where the company appropriated the consideration and did not object upon notice (including substitution under Order 21, Rule 16 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908), that conduct amounted to ratification; any remedy for irregularity lies against the manager personally rather than to defeat the rights of a bona fide assignee.
Conclusion: In favour of Respondent; the assignment was held valid and binding, the sales were ratified by the company's conduct, and the appeals are dismissed.