Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act 1932 section 17 rights and duties of partners Year: 1958 Page 1 of about 9 results (0.090 seconds)

Feb 17 1958 (HC)

Bombay Cotton Export Import Co. Vs. Bharat Suryodaya Mill Co. Ltd.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Feb-17-1958

Reported in : AIR1959Bom307; (1958)60BOMLR894; ILR1958Bom1351

..... register called the register of firms, and shall file the statement.' 3. in 1947 the plaintiffs applied under section 58 in the registrar of firms appointed under the indian partnership act, 1932, for registration as a firm and they were duly registered. the indian partnership act undoubtedly applied to karachi in january 1947 and the plaintiffs were properly registered as a firm in january 1947 ..... firm at the date when the suit was instituted, the suit was barred by section 69(2) of the indian partnership act, 1932. 2. the plaintiffs carried on business in cotton in karachi prior to the partition of india, the plaintiffs applied for registration under the indian partnership act, 1932, to the registrar of firms at karachi for registration of their firm stating that ..... registration to avoid the bar of section 69 of the indian partnership act. section 69 of the indian partnership act, by sub-section (2), provides : 'no suit to enforce a right arising from a contract shall be instituted in any court by or on behalf of a firm against any third party unless the firm shown in the register of firms as partners in the firm.' the expression ..... they were carrying on business in karachi and in bombay. the plaintiffs were accordingly registered on 13-1-1947 as a partnership under the indian partnership act, 1932. the plaintiffs filed this suit in the court of the civil judge, s.d. ahmedabad, on 9-3-1951 against the defendants for a decree for rs .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 08 1958 (HC)

Addanki Narayanappa and ors. Vs. Bhaskara Krishtappa and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Dec-08-1958

Reported in : AIR1959AP380

..... the law relating to partnership has now been embodied in the partnership act, act ix of 1932. prior to this act the law relating to partners and their rights inter se was governed by chapter xi of the indian contract act (as it then stood). section 253 of the contract act related to the rights determining the partners' mutual relations and sub-section (7) of section 253 enacted that if ..... in the above. 14. our answer to the question referred to is that the interest of a partner in partnership assets cannot be regarded as a right of interest in immovable property within the meaning of section 17(1)(b) of the registration act. (after the full bench had expressed its opinion on the reference, the second appeal came back to ..... evidenced by a deed was compulsorily registrable under section 17(1)(b) of the registration act. phillips and madhavan nair jj., observed that when a partner retires from a partnership by releasing his rights therein, the property still remains the property of the partnership, and the action in releasing his rights does not actually extinguish his right in the immovable property. the reason for ..... air 1926 mad 1040) held the view that a document which is executed by a partner of a partnership whereby he relinquishes his share in the partnership property, does not fall under section 17(1)(b) of the indian registration act. the learned judges held that although the partnership might hold immovable property the relinquishment would not amount to his having given up his .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 08 1958 (HC)

Jaldu Anantha Raghurama Arya Vs. Jaldu Bapanna Rao and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Aug-08-1958

Reported in : AIR1959AP448

..... partners. it is maintained that the essence of partnership is an agreement between the parties to share the profits and in the case of legatees or donees that element being absent they could not constitute a partnership.to substantiate this, our attention is invited to the definition. of partnership in section 4 of the indian partnership act as also to some passages in mulla's indian partnership act ..... foregoing his own proportionate share in that business.' it is plain that the learned subordinate judge did not approach the question from the right stand point. his criticism regarding the observations of the munsif in para 23 does not stand any scrutiny. the mere fact that an ..... of the privy council in narasimha apparow v. parthasaradhi apparow, ilr 37 mad 199 (pc) are quite pertinent:'in all cases the primary duty of a court is to ascertain from the language of the testator what were his intentions, i.e., to construe the will. it is ..... sahib v. p balarami reddy, : air1953mad958 .42. another consideration that should enter the decision of the point arising under order 6 rule 17 is the stage at which it should be permitted to be raised. unless there are good and proper reasons an amendment of plaint or written ..... administration of justice and they should be made to serve that end. therefore, the powers conferred on a court by order 6 rule 17, c.p.c. should be liberally exercised.but an amendment claiming reliefs absolutely inconsistent with those in the original written statement would not .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 03 1958 (HC)

S.S. Subbier and Vs. Commissioner of Excess Profits Tax, Madras

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Sep-03-1958

Reported in : AIR1959Mad271; [1959]35ITR362(Mad)

..... that looking to the definition of 'partnership' in section 4 of the partnership act, when you have a partnership business, the business is carried on by each of the partners, and the definition of a partnership in the partnership act has been incorporated in the indian incometax act in section 2(6-b). therefore the contention that section 10(1) cannot apply to a partner in a registered firm is untenable because ..... of these do not form a collective whole, distinct from the individuals composing it; nor are they collectively endowed with any capacity of acquiring rights or incurring obligations. the rights and liabilities of a partnership are the rights and liabilities of the partners and are enforceable by and against them undividually.' see pages 23 and 24 of the eleventh edition of lindley on ..... be subbier and narasimhachari. no doubt under the indian income-tax act a firm is an assessable entity, but, it acquires that status by virtue of the explicit provisions contained in that act, and, there are no provisions in the excess profits tax act justifying the carrying forward of this concept into the latter act.17. the very same question which the learned ..... carried on by the same person shall be treated as one business for the purposes of this act.' the question therefore is what does the word 'person' in this proviso mean? the definition in section 2(17) of 'person' is not helpful since all it says is that 'person' includes a hindu undivided family.'we have therefore to fall back .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 03 1958 (HC)

S.S. Subbier and S.R. Narasimachari, Proprietors, Sri Kothandaram Spin ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Sep-03-1958

Reported in : (1959)2MLJ78

..... looking to the definition of 'partnership' in section 4 of the partnership act, when you have a partnership business, the business is carried on by each of the partners, and the definition of a partnership in the partnership act has been incorporated in the indian income-tax act in section 2(6)(b). therefore the contention that section 10(1) cannot apply to a partner in a registered firm is untenable ..... do not form a collective whole, distinct from the individuals composing it ; nor are they collectively endowed with any capacity of acquiring rights or incurring obligations. the rights and liabilities of a partnership are the rights and liabilities of the partners and are enforceable by and against them individually. 16. see pages 23 and 24 of the eleventh edition of lindley on ..... there are two firms consisting of exactly the same partners, the real position in law is that there is only ..... partnership. 17. in vissonji sons & co. v. commissioner of income-tax, bombay : [1946]14itr272(bom) it was observed:in law a firm has no existence independently of its partners, and if .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 24 1958 (HC)

Vyrathammal Vs. Somasundaram Pillai and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Nov-24-1958

Reported in : (1959)2MLJ429

..... the plaintiffs' claim could not be sustained on the basis of section 37, partnership act. the suit was not to enforce rights under section 37, for the plaintiffs did not claim as representatives of a deceased partner for recovery of the profits earned by the partner's assets being utilised by the surviving partners but for accounts as partners of the firm.(iv) a suit by the heirs or ..... v. jai mangal a.i.r. 1926 p. 364.5. the plaintiff's mother died on 20th april, 1950 and it will be noticed that the plaintiff's brothers have dutifully carried out the family arrangement by the entry made in the accounts on 30th june, 1950 and have allowed the plaintiff to take possession and occupy the house. it is ..... in order to the determination of the profits under section 37 of the partnership act as he formerly was so entitled under section 88 of the indian trusts act and as rule of justice, equity and good conscience. this decision undoubtedly supports the stand taken by the learned advocate for the appellant. in this case the old partnership had been taken over with all its. assets by ..... this nature not brought within three years, from the date of death of bagampiriyal ammal was barred by article 106 of the limitation act. see also peeran sahib v. jamaluddin saheb a.i.r. 1958 andh. pra. 48.17. the net result of this analysis is that this second appeal is bound to fail and it is dismissed but in the circumstances .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 20 1958 (HC)

Ulhasibai Jethmal Bagmar Vs. Bhagchand Alias Bhagwandas Nemichand Marw ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Aug-20-1958

Reported in : (1959)61BOMLR103

..... author, was established by numerous decisions before the english partnership act, 1890, and the result of these decisions was incorporated in sections 29 and 30 of the said act. sections 16 and 50 of the indian partnership act would correspond to sections 29 and 30 of the english partnership act. section 16 provides:subject to contract between the partners-(a) if a partner derives any profit for himself from any transaction of the ..... belonging to the firm are deemed to have been acquired for the firm.the first paragraph of this section shows what would be the property of a firm. all property and rights and interest in property which have been brought by the partners into the stock of the firm or which have been acquired or purchased by or for the firm ..... support of his contention that in such a case the house would be the property of the partnership. section 14 of the partnership act reads as follows:subject to contract between the partners, the property of the firm includes all property and rights and interest in property originally brought into the stock of the firm, or acquired, by purchase or otherwise, by or for the ..... and under that rule, property and rights and interests in property acquired with money belonging to the firm will be deemed to have been acquired for the firm unless a contrary intention appears. in our opinion, this section would not be applicable to the facts of the present case. there is no dispute that the partnership between the two brothers was dissolved .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 01 1958 (HC)

Shyamlal Roy Vs. Madhusudan Roy and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Aug-01-1958

Reported in : AIR1959Cal380

..... would be that of partners, if it is a case of partnership of all the members or sub-partners. if it is a case of partnership of the kartas. in either case, it is an association for gain. such a partnership is illegal under section 4 of the indian companies act. section 4(1) of the indian companies act provides as follows:'4 ..... be a representative in interest of the so-called kartas. this argument of mr. dutt is clearly not tenable.17. mr. dutt next argued that in the absence of outside partners named in the partnership deed, there cannot be any adjudication on the factum or validity of those deeds in this suit. the ..... the plaintiff, the inevitable consequence would be the dismissal of the suit. the court will not proceed then to adjudicate the rights of the parties on the footing of partnership. i hold that the suit is not bad for non-joinder of parties.18. a point of res judicata has been raised ..... premises no. 2, deben dutt lane are in the same terms. the rate bill with respect to premises no. 22, hara chandra mullick street and 17. hara chandra mullick street shows that the owners are: 'estate ganga sagar, estate ananda mohon, estate hara mohon and estate brojo mohon saha roy' ..... out of them, only six have filed written statements. defendants nos. 2, 9 and 20 have filed a written statement jointly. defendants nos. 8 and 17 have filed another written statement jointly. a third written statement has been filed by defendant no. 9b. there are, therefore, three written statements on record .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 12 1958 (HC)

Sm. Padmabati Paul and ors. Vs. Pannalal Paul and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : May-12-1958

Reported in : AIR1959Cal156

..... of rs. 34,180/-to the petitioner the other partner, the property of the partnership and assets including books of account, papers, documents and vouchers and goodwill shall vest in and belong to hooseinbhoy. this award was challenged, inter alia, on the ground that the above provisions run counter to section 48 of the indian partnership act. the award was attacked on the ground that notwithstanding ..... the award, the petitioner continues to be liable to third parties for the entire partnership debts. the result may be that if the petitioner is compelled to pay more than her proper ..... paper mills ltd., bholanath paper house, arrears of rent and other small sundry debts; 2. sm. padmabati paul, satya charan paul and amarnath paul will from this day have no right, title and interest in the said two businesses nor will they have any liability or debt of the said two businesses; 3. pannalal paul, chunilal paul and lakshman chandra paul ..... the arbitrator to answer each one of the issue. i should state, however, that this point is not very strongly pressed. i hold that this point is without any substance.17. no other point has been urged in support of the application. 18. for reasons stated above, the application is dismissed with costs. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 14 1958 (HC)

Haji Abdul Shakoor Vs. the Rent Control and Eviction Officer, Kanpur a ...

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Jan-14-1958

Reported in : AIR1959All440

..... shown by all the relevant facts taken together, in determining whether a group of persons is or is not a firm or whether a person is or is not a partner in a ..... quite correct as discussed by me below).the fact that there was no intention to create a partnership was clear from the deed and the surrounding circumstances considered together. learned counsel relied on section 6 of the indian partnership act, which lays down that regard must be had to the real relation between the parties, as ..... together with a certificate of the registrar of firms, uttar pradesh, to prove that the firms had been duly registered under section 68 of the indian partnership act.4. the rent control and eviction officer heard all the four applications and the petitioner's objection together on 10-9-1956. ..... lord langdale and mr. baron rolfe. the headnote runs as follows:'it is the duty of a party asking for an injunction to bring under the notice of the court of facts material to the determination of his right to that injunction, and it is no excuse for him to say that he was ..... fixed a date for allotment.this gesture on the part of the rent control and eviction officer would not convert the proceedings under section 7 (2) into a quasi-judicial enquiry.17. however, this controversy is academic in view of two facts. first, the rent control and eviction officer did in fact hear the .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //