<?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>1943 (5) TMI 11 - Privy Council</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469826</link>
    <description>A signature on a commercial account statement may amount to a binding promise to pay an existing debt where the surrounding circumstances show an intention to assume liability. The opening of a fresh account, the altered interest terms, the further advance, and the commercial relationship between the parties supported that construction, and the alternative basis of liability was sufficiently pleaded and proved. The substituted liability also provided valid consideration through novation, reinforced by the fresh advance and changed accounting position. The decree against the respondent was restored, and liability was enforced against his estate to the extent of the inherited property.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 12 May 1943 00:00:00 +0630</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Jul 2026 17:25:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=910341" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1943 (5) TMI 11 - Privy Council</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469826</link>
      <description>A signature on a commercial account statement may amount to a binding promise to pay an existing debt where the surrounding circumstances show an intention to assume liability. The opening of a fresh account, the altered interest terms, the further advance, and the commercial relationship between the parties supported that construction, and the alternative basis of liability was sufficiently pleaded and proved. The substituted liability also provided valid consideration through novation, reinforced by the fresh advance and changed accounting position. The decree against the respondent was restored, and liability was enforced against his estate to the extent of the inherited property.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 May 1943 00:00:00 +0630</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469826</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>