<?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 (11) TMI 33 - HIGH COURT OF KERALA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97893</link>
    <description>Demand drafts were treated as a contract for transmission rather than mere deposits: the instrument&#039;s negotiable character did not exclude an implied agreement, and parol evidence and trade usage may prove collateral or implied terms. Contemporaneous accounting (earmarked/suspense entries), bank forms and practice, and witness evidence supported that purchasers paid to effect remittance; on that basis the payers&#039; funds were held in a fiduciary/agency capacity. The operative effect is that purchasers of the drafts are entitled to priority in the bank&#039;s liquidation as beneficiaries of that agency/trust relationship rather than as ordinary creditors.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 06 Nov 1961 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Jan 2012 14:57:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=134950" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1961 (11) TMI 33 - HIGH COURT OF KERALA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97893</link>
      <description>Demand drafts were treated as a contract for transmission rather than mere deposits: the instrument&#039;s negotiable character did not exclude an implied agreement, and parol evidence and trade usage may prove collateral or implied terms. Contemporaneous accounting (earmarked/suspense entries), bank forms and practice, and witness evidence supported that purchasers paid to effect remittance; on that basis the payers&#039; funds were held in a fiduciary/agency capacity. The operative effect is that purchasers of the drafts are entitled to priority in the bank&#039;s liquidation as beneficiaries of that agency/trust relationship rather than as ordinary creditors.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Nov 1961 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97893</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>