Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act 1932 section 17 rights and duties of partners Year: 1967 Page 1 of about 4 results (0.091 seconds)

Nov 30 1967 (HC)

Agarwal and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Nov-30-1967

Reported in : [1968]68ITR673(All)

..... others in carrying on a business is equally well settled. the partnership that is created is a contractual partnership and will be governed by the provisions of the indian partnership act, 1932. the partnership is not between the family and the other partners ; it is a partnership between the coparcener individually and his other partners (see kshetra mohan-sannyasi ckaran sadhukhan v. commissioner of excess profits tax : [1953]24itr488(sc ..... question .referred to us is stated as follows :' whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, registration was rightly refused to the firm on the ground that it violated the provisions of section 4 of the indian companies act, 1913 ?'23. i think we ought to approach this question from the angle of the facts and circumstances of the case found ..... hindu law would come into existence.17. mr. jagdish swarup also placed reliance upon senaji kapurchand v. pannaji devichand, a.i.r. 1930 p.c. 300, 301 and cited the following passage from that report for my consideration :' we think that under section 4, companies act, what we have to see is whether, where an association or partnership is formed for purposes of carrying .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 25 1967 (HC)

Union of India (Uoi) Owning Western Railway Vs. Lalji Bhimji

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Apr-25-1967

Reported in : AIR1969Guj55

..... the provisions of the indian partnership act and by one nanubhai harjivandas in his individual capacity. the contention of mr. mankad, the learned advocate for the respondent, is that the same person, namely, nanubhai harjivandas who has filed this darkhast was described as a manager and co-partner of the joint hindu ..... come forward to execute that decree in this darkhasti proceedings. a joint hindu family firm is a firm not governed by the provisions of the partnership act, but by the normal personal law governing the hindus. both the firms, even if sharers are the same, stand on a different footing -- ..... do not, therefore, think that any such order can be passed in this proceeding and the learned district judge was, therefore, right in not exercising his powers under section 151 of the civil procedure code for directing the respondent to deposit the amount in court. since, however, the appellant succeeds on the first ..... 13 of order 21 of the civil procedure code. the observations as i just stated above related to the defect even contemplated under rules 11 to 17 of order 21 of the civil procedure code and if that defect is not remedied within the time allowed by the court, such an application cannot ..... it being that,' it was described overleaf, 'which it was not.' it was then observed that looking to the provisions of rules 11 to 17 of order 21 of the civil procedure code, the defect, when pointed out, not having been remedied within the time allowed, the application continued to be .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 14 1967 (HC)

Mangat Ram Hazari Mal and Another Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Punj ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Sep-14-1967

Reported in : [1968]67ITR788(P& H)

..... the definition in section 4 of the indian partnership act, 1932, which says that :'partnership is the relation between persons who have agreed to share the profits of a business carried on by all or any of them acting for all.persons who have entered into partnership with one another are called individually partners and collectively ..... right up to the tribunal, in as much as it was the contention of the assessee that it should be assessed as a registered firm. as this status was being denied to it on the ground that the instrument of partnership did not bring about a valid firm under the partnership act ..... , the assessee replied by saying, 'then why treat me as a firm at all i am not an assessable entity in any sense.' to this the revenue said : 'no, you are an association of persons. you are an assessable entity. the income-tax officer erred in labeling you as an unregistered firm.' the tribunal rightly ..... correct an error in the manner just and proper in the circumstances of the case. i am satisfied that in this case the tribunal acted rightly in ordering the correction of status and upholding the assessment in the corrected status. no prejudice has been caused to the assessee. it ..... of the case, the assessees status is association of persons ?(3) whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the tribunal rightly upheld the appellate assistant commissioners refusal to allow raising of an additional ground regarding disallowance of rs. 6,800 paid as salary to shri .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 15 1967 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Hind Construction Ltd.

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Nov-15-1967

Reported in : [1970]78ITR664(Cal)

..... firm is not a juristic person. the partnership has been defined in section 4 of the indian partnership act, 1932, which reads as follows:'partnership is the relation between persons who have agreed to-share the profits of a business carried on by all or any of them acting; for all.persons who have entered into partnership with one another are called individually 'partners' and collectively 'a firm' and the ..... corporate body with the right of perpetual succession nor its existence depends upon substantive law. the creation, continuation and extension of a firm is purely contractual and depends on the agreement between the partners. it is in that sense that mr. d. n. pritt in the latest edition of pollock & mulla's the sale . of goods act and the partnership act, 3rd edition, has made ..... the firm. that contingency occurs where the terms of the partnership agreement provide that on the death of a partner the firm will not be dissolved. juristically speaking, a person is one which is capable of rights and duties. in analysing the concept of' 'right', it appears that a 'person' is a subject and object of 'right'. such a 'person' may be natural or legal or ..... not. in short, the firm is treated very much as if it were a corporation ; it is an artificial or 'moral' person for business purposes. ...' 17. thus, a partership firm in india, although for limited purposes, is an individual or person or an entity, a legal personality cannot be attributed to it. in this connection reference .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 26 1967 (HC)

Sri Baba Commercial Syndicate and anr. Vs. Channamasetti Dasu and anr.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jun-26-1967

Reported in : AIR1968AP378

..... view of law that the decision of a suit under section 69 of the indian partnership act is not one on merits and no such decision can operate as res judicata. what must necessarily follow is that a fresh suit can be brought after the registration of a firm or after the name of a partner has been brought on the register of firms or ..... used in its widest sense and would inevitably include realisation of the debt due to the partnership firm from a third party. on the dissolution of ..... and the person suing is or has been shown in the register of firms as a partner in the firm. sub-section (3) to section 69, however, provides certain exceptions to the general rule laid down in sub-sections (1) and (2). it provides that a partner can enforce any right to sue for realising the property of a dissolved firm. now the word 'property' is ..... enforced if the firm is dissolved and by an arrangement the collection of the debts is entrusted to one of the partners or if one partner gives up his right as is the case here and the remaining sole partner is the only partner left. subsection (8) is attracted in all such cases and a suit can thus be instituted against a third party for .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 16 1967 (HC)

Kasturbhai Ramchand Panchal and Brothers and ors. Vs. Firm of Mohanlal ...

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Aug-16-1967

Reported in : AIR1969Guj110; (1968)GLR729

..... of the entire suit premises. the short facts which have given rise to these revision applications are as under: the plaintiff is a partnership firm registered under the indian partnership act. the plaintiff is the manufacturer and dealer in steel furniture and steel goods. the plaintiff has a factory in the interior of ..... : air1956bom560 by the division bench consisting of dixit and vyas jj. in that case, the question had arisen in the context of section 76 of the tenancy act which conferred powers on the revenue tribunal to entertain a revision application on the following grounds only (a) that the order of the ..... side, then, the tenant would fail and the decree for possession would be passed in favour of the landlord. the legislature has contemplated in section 13(2) a delicate process of weighing the relative hardships, and it in terms directs the court to consider the most important question as to ..... . in fact, mr. shah, the learned advocate for the landlord, is right in his contention that the evidence of the plaintiff which was led before the appellate court has been misread by the learned appellate judge. the partner of the plaintiff, in his deposition before the trial court, had in terms ..... . the appeal stood transferred to the city civil court at ahmedabad. when it came up for hearing, the learned judge passed the order, exhibit 17, permitting additional evidence, as the same was required on the question as to whether, no hardship would be caused to either party if a decree .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 30 1967 (HC)

Rattan Cloth House Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, PatialA.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Mar-30-1967

Reported in : [1967]65ITR465(P& H)

..... close of the year, were credited to the accounts of the respective partnership act. after dalip singh left the partnership, a fresh partnership came in to existence between the remaining partnership and a deed with regard to the same was drawn up on 23 july, 1958. this firm was also registered under the indian partnership act. dalip singh had been paid his dues up to january 26, 1960 ..... -58, profits according from the business were credit to the individual accounts of partners in proportion to their respective shares. on september 12, 1957, an application for the registration of this firm under section 26a of the indian income-tax officer. on 1st of april, 1958, dalip singh let the partnership, as he had gone to bombay to join service with the result that ..... , on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the partnership should been registered by the income-tax authorities under section 26a of the income-tax act ?'that has led to this reference.the appellate tribunal came to the conclusion that the partnership was not genuine and, therefore, the registration was rightly disallowed by the income-tax officer. learned, counsel for the revenue contented ..... regard to the assessment year 1958-59, he found that the firm was registered with the registrar of firms on october 17, 1957, and towards the end of the year, there was also a division of the profits amongst the partners. he did not agree with the income-tax officer that the division of assets by the father should have been effected .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 31 1967 (HC)

New Cotton and Wool Pressing Factory Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, R ...

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Mar-31-1967

Reported in : [1967]65ITR662(Raj)

..... not the owner of the immovable property and the ownership of the property vests in the partners of the firm. in support of his argument, has he referred to section 19 of the indian partnership act, 1932. it would be proper to reproduce here section 9(1) of the act and section 19 of the indian partnership act on whose interpretation the above argument is based. they run as follows.income-tax ..... be pointed out that section 14 and 15 of the indian partnership act make a clear distinction between the property of the firm as such, and property of its individual partners. both the sections are reproduced there to appreciate this position of law properly. they are as follows :'14. subject to contract between the partners, the property of the firm includes all property and rights and interests in ..... the firm as envisaged in section 14 of the partnership act is a part of the assets of the firm. in law the joint effects of a partnership firm belong to a firm and a partner has no individual property in specific assets of the firm and has no exclusive right to possess or use the partnership property. the interest of each partner is a share in the ..... a registered firm. it was held by their lordships that 'the co-widows succeed as co-heirs to the estate of their deceased husband and take as joint tenants with rights of survivorship and equal beneficial enjoyment; they are entitled as between themselves to an equal share of the income. though they take as joint tenants, no one of them has .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 28 1967 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay Vs. Dhurmal Bajaj and Co.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Feb-28-1967

Reported in : [1967]65ITR244(Bom)

..... document in that case : (1) that though kantilal kesherdeo was a minor, he was admitted as a full partner and not merely to the benefits of the partnership, as required by section 30 of the indian partnership act; (2) that kantilal kesherdeo was signatory to the document of partnership, though below his signature was appended the signature of his natural guardian; (3) that kantilal kesherdeo was described ..... as a full partner entitled not only to a share in the profits, but also liable to bear all the ..... ram & co. v. commissioner of income-tax. in approving those decisions the supreme court stressed the ratio of hardutt's case : '.... where a minor is admitted as a full partner with equal rights and obligation with adults, the deed is invalid'. similarly, in approving banka mal's case, the supreme court pointed out that 'it is held that a minor cannot be ..... for the assessment years 1953-54 and/or 1954-55 on the basis of the deed dated april 14, 195 ?' a : for the assessment year 1953-54... in the negative. 17. for the assessment year 1954-55.... in the affirmative. 18. there shall be no order as to costs. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 17 1967 (SC)

Ram Laxman Sugar Mills Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Uttar Pradesh a ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Mar-17-1967

Reported in : [1967]66ITR613(SC)

..... to share the profits of a business carried on by all or any of them acting for all.' under an agreement of partnership there must arise the relation of principal and agent inter se between the members ..... as representing the family entered into an agreement of partnership with other persons, it cannot be inferred that an agreement of partnership was intended contrary to law between a hindu undivided family consisting of all adult members, females, minors and even unborn persons and strangers to the family. 9. a partnership under section 4 of the indian partnership act is 'the relation between person who have agreed ..... suraj bhan alone : it was not by the use of that expression intended to invest the members of the joint family of dina nath nanak chand with the rights and liabilities of the partners. several other clauses of the deed, e.g., clauses 8 and 15 and other clauses seek to emphasize that the members of the joint family of dina nath ..... chand were not entitled to interfere with the management or to deal with the assets of the partnership. but no implication arise therefrom that but for those covenants the members of the joint family would have the competence or the rights negatived thereby. by clause 17 it is provided that in case of death or inability of either of the managing directors to .....

Tag this Judgment!


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