https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98189 A charge created pursuant to an antecedent promise to secure a creditor is impeachable as a fraudulent preference where the debtor's dominant intention is to prefer that creditor; on the facts, the security was void against the liquidator except for the part not involving any preference. The challenge to registration also failed because the registrar's certificate was treated as conclusive evidence of compliance with the statutory registration requirements, even though the stated execution date was incorrect. The rectification power was not treated as displacing that protection on the facts, so the registration remained effective. en-us Wed, 17 Mar 1965 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 19 Jan 2012 15:48:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98189 A charge created pursuant to an antecedent promise to secure a creditor is impeachable as a fraudulent preference where the debtor's dominant intention is to prefer that creditor; on the facts, the security was void against the liquidator except for the part not involving any preference. The challenge to registration also failed because the registrar's certificate was treated as conclusive evidence of compliance with the statutory registration requirements, even though the stated execution date was incorrect. The rectification power was not treated as displacing that protection on the facts, so the registration remained effective. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 17 Mar 1965 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98189