https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98755 Where the Companies Act made the registrar's certificate conclusive evidence that registration requirements had been complied with, the certificate could not be challenged by showing that the charge particulars misstated the true date of creation or that registration was in fact outside the statutory 21-day period. The court treated the time limit as within the scope of the certificate's conclusiveness and held that earlier errors in dating or particulars did not undermine the security. It also held that the maxim against taking advantage of one's own wrong did not defeat reliance on the certificate absent fraud or proved prejudice, and that rectification provisions did not authorise deletion of the whole registration. en-us Thu, 14 May 1970 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 16 Feb 2018 10:44:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98755 Where the Companies Act made the registrar's certificate conclusive evidence that registration requirements had been complied with, the certificate could not be challenged by showing that the charge particulars misstated the true date of creation or that registration was in fact outside the statutory 21-day period. The court treated the time limit as within the scope of the certificate's conclusiveness and held that earlier errors in dating or particulars did not undermine the security. It also held that the maxim against taking advantage of one's own wrong did not defeat reliance on the certificate absent fraud or proved prejudice, and that rectification provisions did not authorise deletion of the whole registration. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 14 May 1970 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98755