<?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>2009 (6) TMI 1008 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196221</link>
    <description>Vicarious liability for an employee&#039;s fraud arises only if the wrongful act is committed in the course of employment or as an unauthorised mode of doing an authorised act. Where the employee acts for personal advantage outside the scope of employment, the employer is not liable unless it authorised, ratified, or otherwise connected itself with the conduct. On the stated facts, the employee obtained share certificates and transfer documents and then committed fraud for his own benefit; the company neither authorised nor ratified the acts and took disciplinary and police action after discovery. The employer-company was therefore not vicariously liable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 Nov 2017 16:02:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=497277" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (6) TMI 1008 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196221</link>
      <description>Vicarious liability for an employee&#039;s fraud arises only if the wrongful act is committed in the course of employment or as an unauthorised mode of doing an authorised act. Where the employee acts for personal advantage outside the scope of employment, the employer is not liable unless it authorised, ratified, or otherwise connected itself with the conduct. On the stated facts, the employee obtained share certificates and transfer documents and then committed fraud for his own benefit; the company neither authorised nor ratified the acts and took disciplinary and police action after discovery. The employer-company was therefore not vicariously liable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196221</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>