Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act 1932 section 17 rights and duties of partners Year: 1993 Page 1 of about 21 results (0.194 seconds)

Mar 01 1993 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Palliveedu Traders

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Mar-01-1993

Reported in : [1993]204ITR141(Ker)

..... the statements of smt. kadishabi and smt. ayishabi, it is clear that a partnership as contemplated under section 4 of the indian partnership act has not been constituted.5. the definition of partnership in section 4 of the indian partnership act contains three elements, viz., (i) there must be an agreement entered into by all the partners concerned, (ii) the agreement must be to share the profits of the business and ..... not genuine and in refusing registration. that order was rightly confirmed by the appellate assistant commissioner. the appellate tribunal has committed an error of law in finding that the firm is genuine and ..... koya, who was not a partner of the firm. from the statement of mammed haji, it is clear that he knew that smt. kadishabi and smt. ayishabi were only benamidars. it has not been shown that such knowledge had been communicated to the assessing officer in the prescribed manner. in the circumstances, the assessing officer was right in regarding the firm as .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 21 1993 (HC)

Kerala Publicity Bureau Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Jan-21-1993

Reported in : [1993]200ITR366(Ker)

..... interpretation by looking into theaccounts and other documents of the firm which would show how the profit or loss had been actually apportioned between the partners and also by taking recourse to section 13(b) of the indian partnership act, 1932. we, therefore, hold, with great respect to the learned judges, that the decisions in cit v. ithappiri and george : [1973]88itr332(ker) ..... who have agreed to share the profits of a business carried on by all or any of them acting for all.'16. section 13(b) of the partnership act reads as follows :' 13. mutual rights and liabilities.-subject to contract between the partners-- . . .(b) the partners are entitled to share equally in the profits earned, and shall contribute equally to the losses sustained by ..... but in none of these clauses is it stated what the shares of the partners in the profits and losses of the firm were to be and that in our opinion was requisite for registration of the partnership under section 26a of the act and as that was wanting, registration was rightly refused. '40. how far the above finding entered under the particular facts ..... the firm ; '17. arguments were addressed by learned counsel, sri jose joseph, onbehalf of the applicant in i.t.r. no .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 03 1993 (HC)

Oswal Fertilizers Corporation Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Sep-03-1993

Reported in : [1995]215ITR433(Bom)

..... determination of the controversy. 4. sec. 30(1) of indian partnership act, 1932 provides that a minor may be admitted to the benefits of partnership. all the benefits can be conferred on a minor on par with adults. sec. 30(2) of the act provides that a minor who is admitted to the benefits of the partnership shall have a right to share in the property and ..... cit to grant registration to the assessee-firm as contemplated under s. 185 of the it act. the tribunal ..... their survivors or legal heirs shall be bound by the provisions of partnership act, 1932 and the rules framed thereunder from time to time.' the learned counsel for the revenue interpreted this clause to mean that by virtue of this clause, all the rights of full-fledged partners were conferred on minor concerned. we do not agree. this clause is too general ..... son of mulchand raichand oswal were merely admitted to benefits of partnership or whether the said minors were made full-fledged partners in the firm in breach of provisions of law contained in indian partnership act, 1932. the aac held that the above referred minors were merely admitted to benefits of partnership and the partnership deed did not suffer from any infirmity. the aac directed the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 20 1993 (HC)

Swiss Bank Corporation and Canara Bank Vs. Jai Hind Oil Mills Co. and ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jan-20-1993

Reported in : (1993)95BOMLR412

..... section (2) of section 69 of the indian partnership act. sub-section (2) of section 69 reads as follows ;'69. (2) no suit to enforce a right arising from a contract shall be instituted in any c6urt by or on behalf of a firm against any third party unless the firm is registered and the persons suing are or have been shown in the register of firms as partners ..... facts giving rise to institution of the suit are as follows :the plaintiffs (jai hind oil mills co.) are a partnership firm registered under the provisions of the indian partnership act, 1932, and carry on the business of dealing in the manufacture of various types of edible oils and are also engaged ..... must be accepted. in the present case, the beneficiary presented the documents on october 21, 1985, and the beneficiary had carried out his duties strictly in terms of the letter of credit. the issuing bank--the canara bank--had no objection whatsoever to the acceptance of the documents ..... produced along with the commercial documents. the trial judge felt that the swiss bank should have realised that the phytosanitary certificates, exhibits 'g-17, 'g-37' and 'g-49', had corrections and the corrections were on crucial aspects and should have put the swiss bank on guard ..... on record and the submissions urged at the hearing after setting out well-settled principles in respect of scope of an irrevocable document.17. letters of credit are the most frequent method of payment for goods in the export trade and have been described as the life .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 30 1993 (HC)

Bejoy Kumar Bose and ors. Vs. the Traffic Manager, Calcutta Port Trust ...

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Aug-30-1993

Reported in : (1994)1CALLT108(HC)

..... suppresses material facts.15. the learned counsel for the appellants has strenuously argued that in view of the presumption raised under section 68(2) of the indian partnership act, the appellants have been able to prove that the appellant no. 1 became a partner of the reconstituted firm and the contents of the intimation or notice recorded in the register of firms are prima facie ..... :-20. 'the high court was, of course, clearly in error in issuing a mandamus directing the district magistrate to grant a licence, where a statute confers power and casts a duty to perform any function before the power is exercised or the function is performed, the court cannot in exercise of writ jurisdiction supplant the licensing authority and take upon itself ..... . 1 and the registrar filed it along with the statement relating to the firm already filed under section 59.18. the entry in the register of firms under sub-section (2) of section 68 of the partnership act cannot per se take away the right and/or interest of any partner. the certified copy of an entry of the register of firms can be produced to prove ..... the same manner as in section 61. section 33 of the act deals exclusively with recording of changes in the constitution and dissolution of a firm. under this section, and incoming, continuing or outgoing partner may give notice to the registrar of the change and the registrar shall file the notice along with statement relating to the firm filed under section 59.17. it is obvious from .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 22 1993 (TRI)

Vijayalakshmi Agarbathi Works Vs. Second Income-tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT

Decided on : Sep-22-1993

Reported in : (1994)49ITD311(Bang.)

..... shyam lal [1977] 109 itr 154 wherein it is laid down : ... though the partnership deed of an erstwhile firm did not contain any stipulation that the firm would not be dissolved on the death of one of the partners, but, by virtue of section 42(c) of the indian partnership act, 1932, the firm stood dissolved, the firm which took over the business after the dissolution ..... of the erstwhile firm could not be said to be a reconstituted firm and section 188 and not section 187 of the income-tax act, 1961, would apply in such a case, ..... the assessment passed for the whole of the previous year.7. the statutory implication of bringing a firm to a dissolution upon death of a partner by section 42(c), indian partnership act, is subject to contract between the partners. shri gowthama stated that the partnership deed dated 5-3-1974 did not contain a clause to the contrary and, on the other hand, the surviving ..... which no provisions are made, shall be decided upon by all partners, by mutual consent and in accordance with the indian partnership act.the argument was that the surviving partners had not either expressly or impliedly consented to continue the same firm so much so the legal consequences of section 42(c) of the indian partnership act was not averted. he supported his argument on the principle .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 18 1993 (HC)

Maintech Engineers Vs. Jotindra Steel and Tubes Ltd. and anr.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Mar-18-1993

Reported in : 1993(2)ARBLR427(Delhi); 51(1993)DLT463

..... the registrar of firms,delhi and that he is one of the partners of the petitioner firm. he has also filed ex. p-1, a photocopy of the form-a of registrar of firms, maintained under section 29 of the indian partnership act. a perusal of this document shows that parvinder ..... singh and amarjit singh chopra are the two partners of the ..... a partnership firm duly registered under the indian partnership act and shri parvinder sing his one of the partners ?(8) the case of the petitioner has been that the petitioner is a registered partnership firm, duly registered under the partnership act andparvinder singh is a registered partner. in his affidavit, swori. on, 11.11.1991,parvinder singh has stated that the petitioner is partnership firm, duly registered under the indian partnership act, 1932 with .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 20 1993 (HC)

K. Vimala Devi and ors. Vs. Mrs. Kasthuri and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Apr-20-1993

Reported in : (1993)2MLJ243

..... provisions of the indian partnership act, 1932, and any statutory modification thereof,5. we are conscious that the effect of a minor being admitted to the benefits of the partnership is to make him cestue qua trust and his rights can be enforced by taking accounts. it follows accordingly and so the provisions of law state that a minor cannot become a partner by contract, but ..... the minors, who are only admitted to the benefits of the partnership. chapter iii of the partnership act contains provisions dealing with the relations of partners to one another. chapter iv contains provisions dealing with relations of partners to third parties. in the latter chapter, there is a provision in section 30 of the partnership act, which says, if a person, who is a minor according ..... to the law to which he is subject may not be a partner in a firm, but, ..... and company : [1961]41itr528(sc) , however, we have some support to our above view that section 30 of the indian partnership act is designed to confer equal benefits upon the minor by treating him as a partner, but it does not render a minor a competent and full partner. in income-tax commissioner v. shah mohands : [1965]57itr415(sc) , this view has been reiterated .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 26 1993 (HC)

Sri Ayyappan Bleaching Factory by Its Proprietor K. Pushpanathan Vs. F ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jul-26-1993

Reported in : (1993)2MLJ456

..... of the technical error committed due to oversight.'but ex.a-22 would show that the plaintiff is a firm registered under the indian partnership act, 1932. in it, it is stated that the report as per section 58(1) of the indian partnership act, 1932 was received and that the firm is registered as 'm/s. sami colour company'. ex.a-22 also states that it is entered ..... business as such, or a burmese buddhist husband and wife carrying on business as such, are not partners in such business. in ..... that ex.a-22 would show that the plaintiff-firm has been registered as a firm under indian partnership act. order 29, rule 1, civil procedure code, reads as follows:suing of partners in the name of the firm (1) any two or more persons claiming or being liable as partners and carrying on business may sue or be sued in the name of the firm if ..... such a firm, to be furnished and verified in such manner as the court may direct.a registered partnership firm can sue in the name of the partner for claim due to it. as per section 5 of the indian partnership act, the relation of partnership arises from contract and not from status and in particular the members of a hindu undivided family carrying on a family .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 22 1993 (HC)

Swiss Bank Corporation and Canara Bank Vs. Jai Hind Oil Mills Co. and ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jan-22-1993

Reported in : 1994(1)BomCR371; [1997]90CompCas518(Bom)

..... -section (2) of section 69 of the indian partnership act.sub-section (2) of section 69 reads as follows :'69. (2) 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 is registered and the persons suing are or have been shown in the register of firms as partners ..... filed by defendant no. 1. the facts giving rise to institution of the suit are as follows : the plaintiffs (jai hind 011 mills co.) are a partnership firm registered under the provisions of the indian partnership act, 1932, and carry on the business of dealing in the manufacture of various types of edible oils and are also engaged in the business of importing and exporting ..... the strict interpretation suggested by the plaintiffs must be accepted. in the present case, the beneficiary presented the documents on october 21, 1985, and the beneficiary had carried out his duties strictly in terms of the letter of credit. the issuing bank-the canara bank-had no objection what so ever to the acceptance of the documents on october 23,1985 ..... failed to notice the discrepancy in documents produced along with the commercial documents. the trial judge felt that the swiss bank should have realised that the phytosanitary certificates,exhibits 'g-17, 'c-t-37' and 'g-49', had corrections and the corrections were on crucial aspects and should have put the swiss bank on guard that there was something amiss. the .....

Tag this Judgment!


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