<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1949 (8) TMI 13 - HIGH COURT OF NAGPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97036</link>
    <description>A company may borrow from one of its directors where its memorandum and articles authorise borrowing for the stated business purpose, provided there is full disclosure and fairness; the director&#039;s fiduciary position does not by itself invalidate the transaction. On limitation, a fixed-term deposit is not a demand deposit, so the three-year period runs from the date the amount becomes payable and Article 60 does not apply. An alleged board resolution did not amount to a valid acknowledgment, the balance sheets were not satisfactorily proved as acknowledgments, and section 14 was unavailable because the winding-up proceeding involved a different cause of action.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 25 Aug 1949 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 13 Jan 2012 17:15:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=134094" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1949 (8) TMI 13 - HIGH COURT OF NAGPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97036</link>
      <description>A company may borrow from one of its directors where its memorandum and articles authorise borrowing for the stated business purpose, provided there is full disclosure and fairness; the director&#039;s fiduciary position does not by itself invalidate the transaction. On limitation, a fixed-term deposit is not a demand deposit, so the three-year period runs from the date the amount becomes payable and Article 60 does not apply. An alleged board resolution did not amount to a valid acknowledgment, the balance sheets were not satisfactorily proved as acknowledgments, and section 14 was unavailable because the winding-up proceeding involved a different cause of action.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 25 Aug 1949 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97036</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>