<?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>1942 (12) TMI 11 - LAHORE HHIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284826</link>
    <description>A court-conducted execution sale becomes invalid once the executing court stays the sale, even if the stay order has not yet been communicated to the ministerial officer conducting it. The officer acts as an instrument of the court, not as an ordinary agent whose authority continues until notice of revocation; once the stay is made, the legal basis for the sale ends and the officer becomes functus officio. Section 208 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 was held inapplicable because the officer&#039;s authority depends on the court&#039;s subsisting power over the sale. The sale was therefore invalid despite the lack of prior communication of the stay.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 01 Dec 1942 00:00:00 +0630</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 12 Dec 2019 16:19:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=597058" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1942 (12) TMI 11 - LAHORE HHIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284826</link>
      <description>A court-conducted execution sale becomes invalid once the executing court stays the sale, even if the stay order has not yet been communicated to the ministerial officer conducting it. The officer acts as an instrument of the court, not as an ordinary agent whose authority continues until notice of revocation; once the stay is made, the legal basis for the sale ends and the officer becomes functus officio. Section 208 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 was held inapplicable because the officer&#039;s authority depends on the court&#039;s subsisting power over the sale. The sale was therefore invalid despite the lack of prior communication of the stay.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Dec 1942 00:00:00 +0630</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284826</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>