<?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>1961 (2) TMI 51 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97848</link>
    <description>Service of requisition and acquisition notices on mills through their managing agents was effective where the communication, read as a whole, clearly identified the corporation and its principal officer. The Court treated service on the managing agent as sufficient service on the mills under the relevant rules and company procedure, so the requisition was valid. For acquisition, goods represented by pucca delivery orders had not passed in title because they remained unascertained until appropriation and delivery; the mills therefore remained the owners for the statutory acquisition process. The acquisition notices were likewise validly served through the managing agents, and title to the requisitioned goods vested in the Government.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 17 Feb 1961 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 30 Aug 2014 21:11:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=134905" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1961 (2) TMI 51 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97848</link>
      <description>Service of requisition and acquisition notices on mills through their managing agents was effective where the communication, read as a whole, clearly identified the corporation and its principal officer. The Court treated service on the managing agent as sufficient service on the mills under the relevant rules and company procedure, so the requisition was valid. For acquisition, goods represented by pucca delivery orders had not passed in title because they remained unascertained until appropriation and delivery; the mills therefore remained the owners for the statutory acquisition process. The acquisition notices were likewise validly served through the managing agents, and title to the requisitioned goods vested in the Government.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Feb 1961 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97848</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>