https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96750 An absolute assignment of part of a future debt was treated as an equitable assignment, not as a charge or hypothecation requiring registration under section 79 of the Companies Act, 1929. The statutory registration requirement was held to apply to security documents and charges, not to every equitable assignment of part of a debt, so non-registration did not invalidate the transaction. A receiver could not reduce the assignee's entitlement by setting off completion expenses or an alleged cross-claim in these proceedings, because that claim did not alter the assignment's enforceability. en-us Thu, 11 Jun 1936 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 16 Feb 2018 11:13:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96750 An absolute assignment of part of a future debt was treated as an equitable assignment, not as a charge or hypothecation requiring registration under section 79 of the Companies Act, 1929. The statutory registration requirement was held to apply to security documents and charges, not to every equitable assignment of part of a debt, so non-registration did not invalidate the transaction. A receiver could not reduce the assignee's entitlement by setting off completion expenses or an alleged cross-claim in these proceedings, because that claim did not alter the assignment's enforceability. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 11 Jun 1936 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96750