Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act 1932 section 52 rights where partnership contract is rescinded for fraud or misrepresentation Page 1 of about 18 results (0.040 seconds)

Aug 10 1961 (HC)

B. Koteswara Rao Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Andhra Pradesh, and O ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : [1962]46ITR882(AP)

..... the death of the former on may 13, 1946, that from that date right up to july 5, 1946, his wife continued to represent him in the said partnership business by reason of the directions given in the will and the provisions of sections 47 and 50 of the indian partnership act, 1932, and, secondly, assuming, however that the firm kotaiah sarabhaiah became dissolved on ..... following contention. the general rule laid does in section 42 of the indian partnership act that the death of one of the partners results in dissolution of partnership in inapplicable to the present case as there was a contract to the contrary within the meaning of that very section. by reason of section 47 of the partnership act the partnership must be deemed to have continued despite the death ..... ending with july 5, 1946, are entitled to the benefit of section 25(4).it is seen that the case of the assessee was not that the partnership was continued under an agreement of the parties which would constitute a contract contrary to section 42 of the indian partnership act but that the partnership was continued under the directions of the testator. this position is ..... any help to the assessee. what was held there was that the words 'subject to the contract between the partners' in section 42 of the indian partnership act do not convey that the idea that the contract must be express and not convey such a contract to continue the partnership after the death of the partner could be inferred from the conduct of the parties. it .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 09 1990 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Nalli Silk Emporium and Another

Court : Chennai

Reported in : [1991]192ITR79(Mad)

..... firm as continuing notwithstanding the death of a partner, the partners have no option to treat the firm as continuing. under the indian partnership act, 1932, the firm gets dissolved and the income-tax officer is not entitled to ignore this consequence. there is nothing in the language of section 187, 188 or 189, according to the high court, which precludes the application of the ..... other matters, viz., matters not specifically referred to in the deeds of partnership, the provisions of the indian partnership act shall be applicable. in other words, there is, under the terms of the partnership, no contract to the contrary, as envisaged in section 42(c) of the indian partnership act. section 42(c) of the indian partnership act provides that, subject to contract between the partners, a firm is dissolved by the death of a ..... and the tribunal was right in taking that view. 6. we may now make a brief reference to the decisions relied on by learned counsel for the assessee. in kaithari lungi stores v. cit : [1976]104itr160(mad) , the argument of the revenue that, for the purposes of section 187 of the act, even in cases where there is no contract to the contrary against .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 19 1959 (HC)

Abdul Razaak Vs. MashiruddIn Ahmed

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : AIR1959Cal660,63CWN766

..... before us in agreement with the learned subordinate judge. the understanding being out of the way and there being nothing else to suggest that there was any contract to the contrary, section 16 of the indian partnership act would have full play and would entitle the plaintiff to the benefit of this disputed supply of 5 lacs 84 thousand 8 hundred bricks. that is enough ..... partnership between the parties was an unregistered one, and, prima facie, therefore, section 69, sub-section (1) may nit the present suit, we are fully satisfied that it is saved by the third sub-section to the said section. the said sub-section (sub-section 3) is inter alia in these terms:'the provisions of sub-sections (1) and (2) shall not affect (a) the enforcement of any right ..... lacs of bricks to the government. the plaintiff also contended that the defendant fraudulently took the payment under a misrepresentation from the government that it was his own supply or a supply on his own behalf and not on behalf of the partnership or on behalf of the parties jointly. upon that footing and upon that allegation, inter alia, he brought the ..... , the defendant's appeal must fail.10. on the plaintiffs cross-objection it is enough to say that, on the materials before the court, the learned subordinate judge was entirely right in refusing to accept the plaintiff's case that there had been settlement and adjustment of accounts between the parties for the period 7th pous 1356 b. s. to bhadra .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 17 1964 (HC)

Sunil Krishna Paul and Other Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, West Beng ...

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : [1966]59ITR457(Cal)

..... to law, no question can arise for interference. in the instant case it appears that the tribunal proceeded on the right direction in negativing the assessees plea on the ground that there was no business in terms of section 4 of the indian partnership act. it has been observed in a case, n. r. wadia and co. v. commissioner of income-tax, that it does ..... returns and divide this return according to respective interest, does not make them partners. as regards sharing the profits within the meaning of section 4 of the indian partnership act, a mere common interest will not make a partnership unless there is a common business. it is indeed true that a right to participate in the profits of trade and business is a strong test of ..... faultless collection of profits but that by itself does not necessarily establish a partnership within the meaning of the partnership act, 1932. accordingly, it seems to us that the principles enunciated in the aforesaid decision do not apply to cases governed by the provisions of section 4 of the indian partnership act. section 6 of this act provides that in determining whether a group of persons is or is not .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 30 1996 (HC)

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Shankar Cottons

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1997)137CTR(Mad)583; [1996]222ITR445(Mad)

..... per the provisions of s. 30 of the indian partnership act, 1932. sec. 6 of the indian partnership act, 1932, determines the mode of existence of the partnership. expln. 2 to s. 6 of the indian partnership act states, who are all the persons who can receive a share in the profit of the partnership business without making them as partners. sec. 30 of the indian partnership act states that a person who is a minor according ..... n. ramachandran, by mutual consent agreeing to give a share in the profits to an adult, miss gita, who is incapable of entering into any contract would not make the partnership invalid and would not disentitle the partnership to the benefits of registration. accordingly, direction was given to the ito to grant registration. aggrieved, the department was in appeal before the tribunal. the ..... registration of the firm cannot be denied by the ito and 2. whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was right in law in overlooking the fact that the partnership deed and form no. 11 have not been signed either by the guardian of miss gita, or by miss gita herself even though she is a ..... s. 256(2) of the it act, 1961 (in short, 'the act'), the tribunal referred the following two questions for the opinion of this court : '1. whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was right in holding that the admission of one miss a. gita, major, to the benefits of partnership would not make the partnership as 'illegal' or 'invalid .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 18 1995 (HC)

Akberali Sons Estate Vs. the Pen Shop

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : ILR1995KAR1400; 1995(6)KarLJ206

..... desire and not based on true need.12. for dealing with the plea of the tenants based on section 15 of the indian partnership act, 1932, i may first notice the statutory provisions in this regard. these are -'section 6. in determining whether a group of persons is or is not a firm, or whether a ..... residential as wed as business purposes. the contract entered into between the said partners to this effect cannot be said to be opposed to law. therefore, in my opinion, the court below has erred in holding that keeping in view the provisions of section 15 of the indian partnership act, the co-owners (partners) are ..... in their families.the court below was also of the opinion that since the building is now the property of the partnership firm, keeping in view the provisions of section 15 of the indian partnership act, 1922, the plea of necessity of the partners or their family members is not of much avail.10. in my ..... (1) thereof, they cannot be said to be 'partners' in the statutory sense.14. now turning to the provisions of section 15 of the indian partnership act, it provides that subject to the contract between the partners, the property of the firm has to be held and used by the partners exclusively for purposes of the ..... by itself cannot negative the plea of necessity of the three co-owners because admittedly neither of the three co-owners can as a matter of right use and occupy the said building.20. the last limb of the contentions raised at the bar is based on the question as to whether .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 27 1984 (HC)

S. Parvathammal Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Chennai

Reported in : [1987]163ITR161(Mad)

..... , but purely one of contract and no heir of a deceased partner can claim to have become a partner without the consent expressed or implied of the other. further, under the provisions of section 46 of the indian partnership act, 1932, on the dissolution of a firm, every partner or his representative as against the other partners or their representatives, has the right to have the property ..... firm without the consent of all the existing partners and this again is subject to a contract between the partners and the provisions of section 30 of the indian partnership act, 1932. the concept of introduction of a third party into a partnership contemplates the subsistence of a partnership. with reference to a partnership of two persons which stands dissolved on the death of one of them, it can ..... claim of the assessee as one not based on any inheritance but relatable one to a contract. on the death of the husband of the assessee on february 19, 1972, the partnership stood dissolved as it consisted of only two persons. under section 42(c) of the indian partnership act, 1932, a firm is dissolved by the death of a partner, though this is stated to ..... a partner of the firm 'south indian manufacturing company'. her capital contribution was stated to be that amount which stood to the credit of her deceased husband, subramania pillai, in the capital account of the firm as on february 19, 1972. for the assessment year 1973-74, the assessee returned a loss of rs. 1,52,098 claiming that she had succeeded .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 19 1998 (HC)

A. Nagappan and 8 Others Vs. M/S. Mc. Adams Chemicals Manufacturing Co ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : 1998(1)CTC694; (1998)IIMLJ435

..... by the notice of a partnership at will -- (1) where the partnership is at will the firm may be dissolved by ..... is there when compared with the other partnerships. clause 5(a) of the partnership deed is specific on this, and the same reads as follows:-'the duration of the partnership shall be that of 'partnership at will.'the determination or the dissolution of the partnership at will is governed by section 43 of the indian partnership act, 1932: section 43 is as follows:'43. dissolution ..... 52. both mr. g. subramaniam as well as mr. t. v. ramanujan, contended that the petitioners have passed a resolution on 15-8- 1996 removing the managing partner from the partnership. they have no power under section 33 of the indian partnership act. they contended that a partner may not be expelled by majority of partners as per section 33 of the indian partnership act. they further contended that a right ..... subramaniam as well as mr. t. v. ramanujan is that since the suit itself is for dissolution, the suit must be construed t6 be one under section 44 of the indian partnership act, 1932 and therefore order 20, rule 15 of civil procedure code will apply. the point is that as per order 20, rule 15 civil procedure code only after the decision by .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 17 1988 (HC)

M.O.H. Aslam Vs. M.O.H Uduman and ors.

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1989)2MLJ172

..... , the rights of parties could be worked out only by applying the provisions of the said code, because exhibit b.2, the retirement deed dated 1.8.1968 is in continuation of the terms and conditions found in exhibit b.1. under the pondicherry (laws) regulation, 1963; the indian partnership act, 1932 was extended to pondicherry on and from 1.10.1963, except for section 69 ..... hereunder dealt with.35. the first of these points is that even though paragraphs 8 to 10 in the plaint refer to certain acts of mismanagement, which would give him a right to seek for dissolution under section 44 of the indian partnership act; he having agreed for a preliminary decision to be rendered as to 'whether the suit is not maintainable'?, he cannot any longer ..... in this appeal.17. the second point is, whether the partnership agreement (exhibit b.1) is a partnership-at-will or not?18. section 7 of the partnership act reads as follows:where no provision is made by a contract between the partners for the duration of their partnership, or the determination of their partnership, the partnership is partnership-at-will.the learned judge the present case, the ..... for the same relief when more than one ground available in law having been pleaded in the plaint; there is no question of election to be made by the plaintiff.52. yet another hurdle put forth is that, plaintiff has come forward with a false claim that his consent had not been obtained for constituting the private limited company, when in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 15 1951 (HC)

Sm. Lilabati Rana Vs. Lalit Mohan Dey and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : AIR1952Cal499

..... no notice in writing had been given as required under section 43. this objection, therefore, must be overruled.14. the learned subordinate judge, however, did not approach this question from the right angle. he referred to certain decisions which dealt with the law before the indian partnership act came into force on the 8th september, 1932. the court is required to examine the facts of the ..... such of its members as in fact entered into a contractual relationship with the stranger; the partnership will be governed by the indian partnership act. (vide mayne's hindu law and usages, eleventh edition, section 308 quoted with approval by the judicial committee in 'ramkrishna v. ratan chand', 58 i a 173.')such a contract however, is dissolved on the death of one member of that ..... partnership, and those persons who reconstitute by mutual agreement after the death or retirement of one of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

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