https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273585 Plaintiff's declaration of title and confirmation of possession of an electric undertaking and its fixtures was upheld; documentary and municipal records and liquidation conduct supported ownership. An arrangement for the Corporation to operate the licensed undertaking with managing agents was held not to constitute a prohibited assignment, so prior-consent rules did not void the agreement. Proof of claim by an unauthorised secretary did not vest the undertaking in the official assignee by reputed ownership; fixtures and buildings were treated as immovable for vesting. Limitation was governed by the rule applicable to immovable property and did not extinguish title before suit. A permanent injunction protecting plaintiff's possession was affirmed. en-us Tue, 10 May 1955 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 03 Jul 2018 18:59:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273585 Plaintiff's declaration of title and confirmation of possession of an electric undertaking and its fixtures was upheld; documentary and municipal records and liquidation conduct supported ownership. An arrangement for the Corporation to operate the licensed undertaking with managing agents was held not to constitute a prohibited assignment, so prior-consent rules did not void the agreement. Proof of claim by an unauthorised secretary did not vest the undertaking in the official assignee by reputed ownership; fixtures and buildings were treated as immovable for vesting. Limitation was governed by the rule applicable to immovable property and did not extinguish title before suit. A permanent injunction protecting plaintiff's possession was affirmed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 10 May 1955 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273585