<?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>1924 (7) TMI 3 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288883</link>
    <description>A company is bound by a manager&#039;s acts done within apparent authority in the ordinary course of business, and a bona fide third party need not verify every internal sanction. On that basis, the assignment and sale of decrees were treated as valid and binding on the company, since the transactions fell within the company&#039;s business powers and were not shown to be ultra vires. The company&#039;s receipt and appropriation of the consideration, together with its failure to object to the assignee&#039;s substitution application, amounted to ratification. The assignee was therefore entitled to execute the decrees after substitution.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Jul 1924 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Jul 2020 11:40:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=616635" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1924 (7) TMI 3 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288883</link>
      <description>A company is bound by a manager&#039;s acts done within apparent authority in the ordinary course of business, and a bona fide third party need not verify every internal sanction. On that basis, the assignment and sale of decrees were treated as valid and binding on the company, since the transactions fell within the company&#039;s business powers and were not shown to be ultra vires. The company&#039;s receipt and appropriation of the consideration, together with its failure to object to the assignee&#039;s substitution application, amounted to ratification. The assignee was therefore entitled to execute the decrees after substitution.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Jul 1924 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288883</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>