Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Mar-03-2003
Reported in : 2003(4)ALLMR1054; 2004(2)BomCR352; 2003(3)MhLj979
..... , 1983, the name of ku. shaila bhavanji shah was not registered as a partner of the suit firm. section 69 of the indian partnership act, 1932 along with maharashtra amendment reads as follows : 'section 69. effect of non-registration.--(1) no suit to enforce a right arising from a contract or conferred by this act shall be instituted in any court by or on a behalf of any person ..... of the partnership act nor sub-section (4) of the said act lay down any exception to the said sub-section by stating therein that in case of an application being made to the register (sic: registrar), the bar of sub-section (2) is diluted. 17. it will be profitable to examine the observations made in the case of bharat suryodaya mills co. ltd., ahmedabad v. ..... categorically taken a defence that the suit is not maintainable as the plaintiffs-firm is not registered under the provisions of indian partnership act. in view of this categorical averment, it was the duty of the plaintiff to supply the names of all the partners which admittedly has not been done. in this view of the matter, the provision of order 30, civil procedure code also have ..... mohatla brothers a firm, : air1969guj178 . in the said judgment, the scope of order 30 vis-a-vis section 69(2) of the partnership act is also discussed. in para 6, after considering .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Dec-22-2003
Reported in : 2004(173)ELT235(Cal)
..... economic zone under the provisions of the aforesaid act shall be stayed.4. he contends that the said company to which supply have been effected by the petitioners at special economic zone at falta is different and separate entity, as the petitioner no. 1 is a partnership firm and the petitioner no. 2 is partner thereof.5. mr. shibdas banerjee, learned senior ..... the establishments are resting with the same persons. it is true under the amended provision of the customs act being chapter xa, that in case of deemed export, the provisions of the customs act will not be applicable until chapter x(a) consisting of sections 76(a) and 76(n) are notified for enforcement. admittedly this has been deferred till january 2004. ..... goods to the exporters within the special economic zone, they are entitled to get the facility of duty draw-back, treating their sale as aforesaid to be deemed export. such duty draw-back facility is allowable under the provisions of foreign trade (development and regulation) act. the petitioners of course have received, and may be receiving in future draw-backs in connection with ..... and/or carrying the goods after sale are transported or carried beyond the indian territorial sea water. this kind of activities are never undertaken by the petitioners, as such, any proceeding under the customs act cannot be initiated against the petitioner. moreover, the amended provisions of the customs act being chapter x(a) dealing with special provisions relating to export in the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Decided on : Dec-19-2003
Reported in : 126CompCas392(Delhi); (2004)1CompLJ368(Del); 109(2004)DLT198; 2004(72)DRJ655; 51SCL214(Delhi)
..... partners, elect to avail of the advantages of forming a limited company. they voluntarily and knowingly bind themselves by the provisions of the companies act. the submission that a limited company should be treated as a quasi-partnership should, thereforee, not be easily accepted. having regard to the wide powers under section ..... between the parties the breach of which is not the subject matter of this winding up petition; the parties are equipped with legal rights and remedies in that regard. fourthly, it is argued that this petition has been filed only because almost unbridled and untrammeled latitude has ..... company's products did not find favor with the consumers. the inexperience of the petitioner and ignorance of the ground realities of the indian market compelled the respondent to advise against investment of further monies. the respondent has assailed the petitioner's insistence on the infusion of ..... it was the respondent's responsibility for distribution of the products of the company, but despite the appropriation of compensation for such services this duty was not diligently discharged by the respondent. furthermore, although original advertisement and promotional costs were to be shared equally between the petitioner and ..... to the domestic forum is not possible; and further that the lack of probity results in injury to the petitioner in his character as member.'' 17. this judgment has been relied on by a single judge of this court in nestle s.a. and others v. i.d. kansal and .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Dec-19-2003
Reported in : 2004(1)ALD(Cri)319; JT2003(10)SC262; 2003(10)SCALE110; (2003)12SCC636
..... years' rigorous imprisonment and, as we have noticed earlier, it was so in the instant case having regard to the punishment prescribed for the offences under section 5(1)(d) of the act as well as section 161 ipc. therefore this argument of the appellants has to be rejected.4. it was then contended that the presumption of guilt available to the prosecution under ..... years or upwards. in the instant case, according to them, since no such consent was taken, the trial court could not have taken cognizance of the offence punishable under section 120b ipc. section 120b ipc makes it abundantly clear that whoever is charged of a criminal conspiracy to commit an offence punishable with death, imprisonment for life or rigorous imprisonment for a term of ..... in the same office and was assigned the work of a 'farash'. one surendra kumar pw-3 who was a partner in the firm m/s. singhal paper products had applied to the ito concerned to return the copy of the partnership deed filed in the said office since he wanted the same for obtaining a loan from a bank. an application ..... purpose and was in its custody. when the ito directed the return of the document, he was doing an official duty on behalf of the government. the order that he passed for the return of the document was an official order and any act which has to be done to fulfil of comply with the said order will also be an official .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Decided on : Dec-15-2003
Reported in : II(2004)BC109; 2004(1)CTC170
..... may be ladies and minors who were admitted for the benefit of partnership. they may not know anything about the business of the firm. it would be a travesty of justice to prosecute all partners and ask them to prove under the proviso to sub-section (1) that the offence was committed without their knowledge. it is ..... the persons who are the accused in the complaint were in-charge and responsible for the conduct of the business of the company.17. admittedly, this sort of allegations as contained in section 141 are absent in the instant complaints. but, it has to be seen whether that would save the petitioners from the prosecution, ..... complainant on the syndicate bank, shevapet, salem-2 were issued by the accused. when the said two cheques were presented for collection from the complainant's indian bank, konganapuram branch on 15.10.2002 both the cheques were returned on 21.10.2002 as unpaid with a memo containing an endorsement 'account closed'. ..... singh ratra and anr. v. n.k. metals 1998 (75) dlt 155, i had the occasion to consider the purport and scope of section 141 of the act. observing that the section being penal in nature, has to be construed strictly, the initial onus to prove that a person was incharge of and was responsible to the ..... purchased cotton from your client of 4,021 kgs as said on 12.9.2000. it is also true that my clients issued 2 cheques dated 17.9.2002 and 3.10.2002 as indicated in your notice.2. my clients want your client to know that at the present my clients are .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Dec-12-2003
Reported in : 2004(1)ALD(Cri)596; IV(2004)BC244
..... 2. the brief facts that are necessary for the disposal of the appeal may be stated as follows :the complainant is a registered partnership firm registered under the indian partnership act, 1952 and has been doing money lending business at gadwal. the complainant obtained the money lending licence on 4.11.1992. the ..... is no other document filed. but, on the other hand, pw-1 categorically stated that he is the managing partner of m/s. sarada finance corporation, which is registered under the partnership act. the said statement is not specifically denied or disputed in the cross-examination. it is not specifically suggested to him ..... (jhade swayam prakash) is not authorized to file criminal proceedings on behalf of the complainant company. ex. p-9 is the copy of the partnership deed. as seen from this document, pw-1 and another person by name g. jeeweshwar are, empowered to represent the firm before all the ..... the case is posted today. even today, none appeared for the accused.perused the record and the documents.8. pw-1 is the managing partner of the complainant company. he stated that the complainant company is carrying on business in money lending. he further stated that on 30.5.1996 ..... grave error in not properly appreciating the contents of ex. p-10.17. in view of the above discussion, i am of the considered view that the accused committed an offence punishable under section 138 of the negotiable instruments act and the findings of the learned magistrate are not in accordance with law .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Jharkhand
Decided on : Dec-12-2003
Reported in : IV(2004)BC84
..... miscellaneous petition has again been preferred by these petitioners to quash the order of the revisional court who has directed that the charges are made out under section 138 of the negotiable instruments act and under section 420, ipc to be framed against them. it does not mean that when the magistrate at this stage did not find charge to be framed under ..... magistrate perused the complainant petition along with the documents produced, considered the statements of the witnesses and found that charge under section 138 of the negotiable instruments act is made out against the petitioner. bishnu dayal gupta and charge under section 420, ipc is made out against the petitioners, sushil kumar gupta and anand swaroop gupta. hence, by order dated 19.3.2002, ..... complainant o.p. no. 2 which he collected towards running capital of the business started at rajasthan which was subsequently closed. the complainant had issued notice under section 138 of the negotiable instruments act by registered post which was refused by the petitioners. however, notices sent under certificate of posting were received. thus, the plea taken by the petitioners that ..... in complaint case no. 46/1999 that he owned and managed a business in khairtal in rajasthan. the said business was originally a partnership business and was running, under the name and style of chanduka oil mills in partnership with the petitioner no, 2 sushil kumar gupta, who consequently retired from the business and, thus, o.p. no. 2-complainant .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Dec-10-2003
Reported in : 2004(1)ALLMR384; 2004(2)BomCR47; (2006)5CompLJ271(Bom)
..... court takes a far stricter and less favourable view of covenants entered into between employers and employee than it does of similar covenant between vendor and purchaser or in a partnership agreements and accordingly, a restraint may be unreasonable as between the employer and employee which would be reasonable as between the vendor and purchaser of a business.'7. as held ..... either of a renewal of the contract or atleast a contractual right that it would have a right of first refusal. in my opinion, therefore, the contention that sub-clause (b) of clause 31 of the contract is hit by section 27 of the contract act is devoid of merit and is rejected.17. the learned counsel for the respondents also referred to and relied ..... that agreement in restraint of trade is void is a common law principle applicable in england while it has a statutory recognition under section 27 of the indian contract act, 1872. while construing the provisions of section 27 of the contract act, the high courts in india have held that neither the test of reasonableness nor the principle that the restraint being partial or reasonable ..... are applicable to a case governed by section 27 of the contract act, unless it falls within the exception. the law commission in its 13th report .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kerala
Decided on : Dec-08-2003
Reported in : 2004(1)KLT407
..... petition. that judgment is under challenge in this writ appeal.3. the appellant was a partner of a firm 'josgo tiles and clay products', a firm registered under the provisions of the indian partnership act. in ext. p2 it is admitted that there were three partners in that firm. they are, the appellant sri. k. surendran nair, sri. ..... committee.- (1) no member of the society shall be eligible for being elected, or appointed as a member of the committee of the society under section 28 if he: xxx xxx xxx xxx(c)(i) is in default to the society or to any other society in respect of any loan or loans ..... to sell the mortgaged properties. on the other hand, the materials on record show that after writing ext. p3 letter, the appellant and the other partners sold away the entire properties mortgaged without the knowledge and consent of the bank and hence the bank had filed a criminal complaint and the case is ..... land wherein the factory was situated were mortgaged to the bank as collateral security. it is admitted that another 2 acres of property belonging to the partners were also mortgaged to the bank. according to the appellant, the firm took a decision to stop the business and made ext. p3 request to ..... which he is a member. the learned counsel relied on the decision reported in m. rajagopalan v. baby alex (1994 (2) klj 754). however, as rightly observed by the learned single judge, the observations contained in the said judgment were mostly in the nature of obiter. at any rate, rule 44(1)(c)( .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Decided on : Dec-05-2003
Reported in : 111(2004)DLT4b; 2004(74)DRJ287
..... the rent to the landlord against the receipts issued by them and, thereforee, there was no question of any sub-letting of the premises to him by the alleged partnership firm and its partners. parties lead evidence in support of their respective pleas. the landlord did not produce the original lease agreement dated 1st april, 1986 which was an insufficiently stamped and ..... .2. briefly, the germane facts leading to the present petition are that the above named landlord had filed an eviction petition under section 14(1)(b) of the delhi rent control act, 1958 (hereinafter to be referred to as the `act') with the averments and allegations that the suit premises comprising of an industrial shed measuring 900 sq.ft. and one room measuring ..... as the alleged `sub-tenant') seeks to challenge the order of the learned additional rent control tribunal, delhi dated 20th november, 2002 thereby allowing an appeal filed by m/s.indian sulphacid industries ltd. (hereinafter to be referred to as the `landlord') against the order of the additional rent controller, delhi dated 16th september, 1999 dismissing an eviction petition filed by ..... allowed to take advantage of this fact only by adopting and using a similar name as that of m/s.metachem enterprises, a partnership firm. thereforee, the learned tribunal has rightly found that m/s.metachem enterprises was a partnership firm of girdhari lal and shiv kumar as on 1st april, 1986 and not a proprietorship concern of the present petitioner.9. mr .....Tag this Judgment!