Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act 1932 section 17 rights and duties of partners Year: 1968 Page 1 of about 10 results (0.090 seconds)

Jun 25 1968 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Janab N. Hyath Batcha Sahib

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jun-25-1968

Reported in : [1969]72ITR528(Mad)

..... clause 6 of the partnership agreement unmistakably indicates that the lorries of the ..... advances made by a partner and the capital contributed by him, for purposes of settlement of accounts between partners at dissolution and in the matter of settlement of priorities of rights and liabilities.6. ..... view to make profit. section 4 of the indian partnership act makes this explicit and says that a ' 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. this relationship does not appear to cloud or destroy the identity of the partners whose rights and liabilities vis-a- ..... and adjustment of the rights of the partners in a dissolved firm is not a transfer, nor it is for a price. '5. in principle what applies to dissolution equally applies to the earlier stage of formation of partnership and handing over of assets to the firm by one or more of its members. section 48 of the indian partnership act makes a distinction between .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 01 1968 (HC)

Bharat Sarvodaya Mills Co. Ltd. Vs. Mohatta Brothers

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Apr-01-1968

Reported in : AIR1969Guj178; (1969)GLR457

..... . these two cross appeals raise an interesting question as to the interpretation of the two mandatory conditions laid down in section 69(2) of the indian partnership act, 1932, hereinafter referred to as 'the act,' in the context of a reconstituted firm by addition of a new partner and when the cause of action had accrued after such reconstitution. first appeal no. 769/1960 is filed by ..... (2), both these mandatory conditions must be held to be cumulative conditions and both of them must be complied with to show that a suit to enforce a contractual right by or on behalf of a firm is maintainable against a third party. these two conditions are enacted for protecting a third party who enters into a contract with the ..... view of the matter, we only hold that the deed ex. 116 was duly acted upon and the plaintiff-firm at the time of the accrual of the cause of action consisted of six partners, including satyavati whose name admittedly is not shown in the register of firms. 17. mr. nanavati next argued that the plaintiff-firm having duly disclosed five names of ..... the adult partners and the sixth minor as having been admitted only to the benefits of the partnership in the reply exts. d l and d 2 on 8th august 1956 as required under order 30 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 28 1968 (HC)

Madhavji Khatau Katira and anr. Vs. Trikamdas Narandas Tanna

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Jun-28-1968

Reported in : AIR1969Guj205

..... the suit. the suit was a suit to recover the debt due, to the firm. it was, therefore, observed:'under section 47, partnership act after the dissolution of a firm, the remaining partners may represent the dissolved firm including the interest of the deceased partner to recover any debt due to the firm. this being the position, they may be taken to represent the deceased ..... expulsion was wrong. it was not bona fide. notice of expulsion was ultra vires, illegal and unenforceable. clause 25 of the partnership agreement is consistent with section 33(1) of the act provided it is exercised in good faith by majority of partners. that the respondent was not expelled by the appellants in good-faith. the firm is dissolved from 27th february, 1962 as ..... intimated to the respondent that he had been expelled from the suit firm. he has been wrongfully expelled. it is a mala fide act of the appellants and it is in contravention of the statutory provisions of the indian partnership act. after the suit notice ex. 28, the respondent was not allowed to take part in the affairs of the suit firm by the ..... in support of his argument. 17. in the case of yakub ibrahim v. a. gulamabbas, air 1958 bom 51. s. t. desai j., as he then was has made the following instructive observations:--'the subject matter of a partnership suit generally is the severance of the jural relationship and the determination of the mutual rights of the partners. there being mutual agency and mutual .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 25 1968 (HC)

National Trading Company Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal I ...

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Apr-25-1968

Reported in : [1969]71ITR513(Cal)

..... .'first part of the clause, namely, the part which permits inspection of the accounts by the minor partners is covered by sub-section (2) of section 30 of the indian partnership act, which reads as follows :'such minor has a right to such share of the property and of the profits of the firm as may be agreed upon, and he may have access to and inspect ..... made a minor full partner could not be regarded as valid for the purpose of registration. it ..... was only empowered to registered a partnership which was specified in the instrument of partnership and it was not open to him to registered a partnership different from that which was formed by the instrument. it was further held that section 30 of the indian partnership act was designed to confer equal benefits upon the minor by treating him as a partner but it did not render a ..... minor a competent and full partner, and any document which .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 20 1968 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Kedarmall Keshardeo

Court : Guwahati

Decided on : Feb-20-1968

..... bajaj, would not affect her individual position in the partnership. she has joined the partnership as the fourth partner and she may be accountable to the minor for the profits she has earned out of the partnership. this automatically does not make the minor, gobindram bajaj, as a fifth partner in the partnership.8. section 4 of the indian partnership act defines ' partnership ' as a relation between persons who have agreed ..... separate and real existence; he is governed by the terms of the partnership deed; his rights and liabilities are governed by the terms of the contract and by the provisions of the partnership act; his liability to third parties for the acts of the partnership is co-equal with that of the other partners; the other partners have no concern with the real owner ; they can only look ..... to him for enforcing their rights or discharging their obligations under the partnership deed. any internal arrangement between him and another partner is not governed by the terms of the partnership; that arrangement operates only on the profits accruing to the benamidar; it is outside the partnership arrangement.'17. a further reference may also be made to a recent decision .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 05 1968 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax, Kerala Vs. Travancore Sugars and Chemicals ...

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Apr-05-1968

Reported in : [1969]71ITR385(Ker)

..... -partnership, the sub-partnership creates a superior title and diverts the income before it ..... as his own. prior to the case of cox v. hickman sub-partners were even liable to the creditors of the original partnership. be that as it may, and whether he is treated as an assignee within section 29 of the indian partnership act, as some cases do, a sub-partner has definite enforceable rights to claim a share in the profits accrued to or received by the ..... partner.'and the court held :'in our view, in the case of a sub ..... becomes the income of the partner. in other words, the partner in the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 15 1968 (HC)

V. Danmull Sowcar Vs. Syed Ali Mohamed

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Feb-15-1968

Reported in : AIR1969Mad214

..... premises for a business in which he is a partner. but as already pointed out, the section does not require that the claim for eviction by alandlord should be for his exclusive business. 7. the definition of 'partnership' in section 4 of the indian partnership act closely follows that in the english partnership act and is as follows: 'partnership is the relation between persons who have agreed to ..... for his occupation expressed by veeraswami, j., appears to be bit strained, but could be justified on the ground that we are dealing with exproprietory legislation which restricts the rights of owners to get possession of their property from their tenants and a generous construction in keeping with the underlying spirit of the enactment is permissible. it is really ..... 312 to negative the contention that a landlord applying for eviction for carrying on a business should do so for his exclusive business only: 'persons who have entered into partnership with one ..... (3) (a) (iii) of the act. venkatadri, j., held that the application was maintainable and that it was not necessary that the building should be required for the applicants' exclusive business. he rightly quoted with approval the following passage with regard to the construction of the word 'own' appearing in firm rajniklal & co. v. vithal pandurang, air 1952 nag .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 28 1968 (HC)

R.N. Oswal Hosiery and Mahabir Wollen Mills Vs. Commissioner of Income ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Mar-28-1968

Reported in : AIR1969P& H8

..... hindu undivided family and local authority. section 3 of the act is the charging section which says:'where any central act enacts that income-tax shall be charged for ..... of whom any proceeding under this act has been taken for the assessment of his income or of the loss sustained by him or of the amount of refund due to him'. sub-section (6b) of the same section defines 'firm', 'partner' and 'partnership' to have the same meaning respectively as in the indian partnership act, 1932. a 'person' under sub-section (9) of section 2 is defined to include a ..... partners of the firm or members of the association individually.'pausing for a moment to see the impact of these definitions on the problem to be resolved by us, it would be noted that though a 'firm' has generally to be given the meaning assigned to it in the indian partnership act, all the same it would be an 'assessee' under sub-section (2) of section .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 28 1968 (HC)

R. N. Oswal Hosiery and Mahabir Woollen Mills Vs. Commissioner of Inco ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Mar-28-1968

Reported in : [1968]70ITR843(P& H)

..... include a hindu undivided family and local authority. section 3 of the act is the charging section which says.'where any central act enacts that income-tax shall be ..... any proceeding under this act has been taken for the assessment of his income or of the loss sustained by him or of the amount of refund due to him.' sub-section (6b) of the same section defines 'firm', 'partners' and 'partnership' to have the same meaning respectively as in the indian partnership act, 1932. a 'person' under sub-section (9) of section 2 is defined to ..... partners of the firm or the members of the association individually.'pausing for a moment to see the impact of these definitions on the problem to be resolved by us, it would be noted that though a 'firm' has generally to be given the meaning to it in the indian partnership act, all the same it would be an 'assessee' under sub-section (2) of section ..... shamsher bhadur j. - the question which fall for determination in the reference made to this court under sub-section (1) of section 66 of the indian income-tax act, 1922 (hereinafter called the act) are these :'(1) whether two partnership firms having common partners and identical shares are as a matter of law one ?(2) if yes, whether the income earned by such two .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 24 1968 (HC)

Prem N. Mayor and ors. Vs. Registrar of Trade Marks and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Apr-24-1968

Reported in : AIR1969Cal80

..... the present appellant is the partnership firm registered under the indian partnership act.25. on this point objection was raised by the learned counsel on behalf of the registrar of trade marks that in fact the appellant is not the registered owner of the trade mark and therefore is not entitled even to object. but that point cannot succeed because section 21 of the trade ..... there the title and its derivation made for a unity of the subject and all the persons claiming thereunder. here all that is absent. it is not the appellant's right or assertion of his trade mark which is in question in the present appeal. the question in the present appeal is whether respondent pannalal agarwal's application to register 'ma ..... and the rules made thereunder emphasise certain broad principles and features. the applicant for registration has certain duties and onus to discharge while making an application for registration of a trade mark. sections 8 to 14 of the act indicate the requisites for registration and the limitations for application. the applicant for registration has to prima facie satisfy the registrar that he does ..... or offends against the provisions of that section on the date of commencement of the proceedings; or (c) that the trade mark was not at the commencement of the proceedings, distinctive of the goods of the registered proprietor. 17. except the presumption noted above there is no other presumption recognised by the statute. the appellant's reliance therefore on the mere .....

Tag this Judgment!


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