<?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>1925 (10) TMI 2 - THE OUDH JUDICIAL COMMISSIONER S COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196282</link>
    <description>Directors are not personally liable for advances made within corporate powers where the transaction was undertaken with board knowledge and assent, supported by an intended security, and no gross negligence or misfeasance is shown. A fiduciary who obtained fixed deposit benefits from the bank was required to account for and repay those sums, because later absence from the board did not end the trust-based obligation. Personal liability also attached to the managing director for an unauthorised overdraft concealed from the board, where he acted for personal advantage and breached his duty of supervision. Ordinary directors were not liable on that overdraft, but the responsible officer was.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 05 Oct 1925 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 Nov 2017 10:31:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=497547" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1925 (10) TMI 2 - THE OUDH JUDICIAL COMMISSIONER S COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196282</link>
      <description>Directors are not personally liable for advances made within corporate powers where the transaction was undertaken with board knowledge and assent, supported by an intended security, and no gross negligence or misfeasance is shown. A fiduciary who obtained fixed deposit benefits from the bank was required to account for and repay those sums, because later absence from the board did not end the trust-based obligation. Personal liability also attached to the managing director for an unauthorised overdraft concealed from the board, where he acted for personal advantage and breached his duty of supervision. Ordinary directors were not liable on that overdraft, but the responsible officer was.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 05 Oct 1925 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196282</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>