<?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>1993 (10) TMI 288 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103486</link>
    <description>A company is not bound by a hire-purchase agreement executed by directors without board authorisation, and no enforceable liability arises where the claimant fails to prove ownership of the vehicles, their delivery to the company, and the essential consideration for a valid hire-purchase transaction under section 2(c) of the Hire-Purchase Act, 1972. Ledger entries and book accounts, without independent corroboration such as vouchers or matching entries in the company&#039;s records, are insufficient to establish an outstanding debt. On those facts, the alleged claims were not proved and the decrees based on the disputed transactions could not stand.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 15 Oct 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 Feb 2012 11:37:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=140525" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1993 (10) TMI 288 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103486</link>
      <description>A company is not bound by a hire-purchase agreement executed by directors without board authorisation, and no enforceable liability arises where the claimant fails to prove ownership of the vehicles, their delivery to the company, and the essential consideration for a valid hire-purchase transaction under section 2(c) of the Hire-Purchase Act, 1972. Ledger entries and book accounts, without independent corroboration such as vouchers or matching entries in the company&#039;s records, are insufficient to establish an outstanding debt. On those facts, the alleged claims were not proved and the decrees based on the disputed transactions could not stand.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 Oct 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103486</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>