<?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>1927 (12) TMI 2 - BEFORE THE PRIVY COUNCIL</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198370</link>
    <description>An outstanding mortgage did not, on these facts, create a title defect allowing the purchaser to refuse specific performance, because the mortgagor could pass only the remaining interest subject to the court-ordered sale, and the mortgage could not override the conveyance made under that sale. Registration was also upheld: under the Registration Act, &quot;persons executing&quot; includes a party who executes through a duly authorised attorney, and execution may be admitted before the registrar personally or through a competent representative. The purchaser&#039;s objections to title and registration therefore failed, and the contract remained enforceable against him.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 05 Dec 1927 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Jan 2018 10:00:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=506576" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1927 (12) TMI 2 - BEFORE THE PRIVY COUNCIL</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198370</link>
      <description>An outstanding mortgage did not, on these facts, create a title defect allowing the purchaser to refuse specific performance, because the mortgagor could pass only the remaining interest subject to the court-ordered sale, and the mortgage could not override the conveyance made under that sale. Registration was also upheld: under the Registration Act, &quot;persons executing&quot; includes a party who executes through a duly authorised attorney, and execution may be admitted before the registrar personally or through a competent representative. The purchaser&#039;s objections to title and registration therefore failed, and the contract remained enforceable against him.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 05 Dec 1927 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198370</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>