https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313871 Authority to proceed in liquidation and be substituted in a mortgage decree was rejected because the alleged assignment was unsupported by a duly signed document and the concurrent findings found no proved authority in Balakram to act for the bank. Secondary evidence of the alleged power of attorney was also refused, as non-production of the original was not satisfactorily explained and the extract was not shown to be a correct copy or made by a proved writer. The plea of ratification or estoppel could not be raised for the first time on appeal. The challenge therefore failed on the concurrent findings against the appellant. en-us Thu, 25 Oct 1945 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 06 May 2024 16:04:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313871 Authority to proceed in liquidation and be substituted in a mortgage decree was rejected because the alleged assignment was unsupported by a duly signed document and the concurrent findings found no proved authority in Balakram to act for the bank. Secondary evidence of the alleged power of attorney was also refused, as non-production of the original was not satisfactorily explained and the extract was not shown to be a correct copy or made by a proved writer. The plea of ratification or estoppel could not be raised for the first time on appeal. The challenge therefore failed on the concurrent findings against the appellant. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 25 Oct 1945 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313871