https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96540 A departmental conduct rule did not render the share purchase void on public policy grounds because it was not an absolute statutory prohibition and no incompatibility with the servant's duties was shown. Applying the Indian rule against a presumption of advancement, the Court treated the transaction as a resulting trust unless a gift was proved, and the evidence did not establish an intended gift to the deceased son. Limitation ran only from the bank's definitive refusal to register the plaintiff's name, so the claim was within time. The Companies Act provisions on trust recognition did not defeat the plaintiff's beneficial claim as between the parties. en-us Fri, 29 Aug 1930 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 09 Jan 2012 11:23:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96540 A departmental conduct rule did not render the share purchase void on public policy grounds because it was not an absolute statutory prohibition and no incompatibility with the servant's duties was shown. Applying the Indian rule against a presumption of advancement, the Court treated the transaction as a resulting trust unless a gift was proved, and the evidence did not establish an intended gift to the deceased son. Limitation ran only from the bank's definitive refusal to register the plaintiff's name, so the claim was within time. The Companies Act provisions on trust recognition did not defeat the plaintiff's beneficial claim as between the parties. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 29 Aug 1930 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96540