Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act Court: andhra pradesh Year: 1973 Page 1 of about 3 results (0.056 seconds)

Dec 31 1973 (HC)

Y. Laxmi Prasannam Vs. Y. Narasayya and anr.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Dec-31-1973

Reported in : AIR1975AP91

..... exact language used in defining the instrument of partition' in section 2(15) of the indian stamp act, 1899.section 2(15) of the indian stamp act reads thus:--'.... instrument of partition means any instrument whereby co-owners of any property divide or agree to divide such property in ..... two equal shares, was an instrument of partition, requiring to be stamped on non-judicial stamps under section 6 read with article 45 of the indian stamp act.17. before we consider the judicial interpretation given by courts to the definition of an 'instrument of partition' it is necessary to know the ..... exist or not.' the court, accordingly held that the deed though styled as a 'deed of dissolution or partnership' amounted to an 'instrument ofpartition' within the meaning of section 2(15) of the stamp act.14. relying upon the decisions of the madras high court in (1889) ilr 12 mad 198 (fb) ..... partnership.' at the relevant time, section 2(15) of the stamp act, which defined the 'instrument of partition', read thus:'...... an instrument of partition is anyinstrument whereby co-owners of any property ..... partition.'13. in board of revenue v. alla-gappa, air 1937 mad 308 (sb), the facts were: a division of the partnership properties was effected between the partners by means of an award passed by arbitrators, calling the deed, in question, as a 'deed of dissolution of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 17 1973 (HC)

Srivenkateswara Constructions and ors. Vs. the Union of India

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jul-17-1973

Reported in : AIR1974AP278

..... to arbitration only related to the settlement of accounts fro two years i.e., 1946-47 and 1947-48 whereas the suit also related to a partnership formed after 1948 in which the plaintiffs were nor partners . in that view , it was observed that there was no purpose in referring the matter ..... stay of suit in i. a. no. 1050 of 1972 in o. s. no. 442 of 1971 under section 34 of the indian arbitration act, hereinafter called 'the act'.2. the plaintiffs filed the suit o. s. no. 442 of 1971 in the court of the subordinate judge, vijayawada against the union of ..... viz., the superintending engineer became the chief engineer , there can be no apprehension that an arbitrator who is a superintending engineer of another circle would act unfairly in favour of his superior. it was further observed that in the absence of any particular set of facts constituting bias a court cannot infer ..... our attention to the following cases. in anderson wright ltd, v. moran and co., : [1955]1scr862 the provisions of sec. 34 of the act were analysed and it was pointed out that one of the conditions is that the court should be satisfied with the readiness and willingness of the defendant at ..... and hence the provisions is opposed to principles of natural justice . it was , therefore, submitted that as the relief under section 34 of the arbitration act is discretionary the application for stay should be rejected. during the course of arguments another contention was raised, viz., that the railway officials were guilty of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 18 1973 (HC)

Konakalla Venkata Satyanarayana (Died) and ors. Vs. State Bank of Indi ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Aug-18-1973

Reported in : AIR1975AP113

..... 8-1964 and his legal representatives viz. his mother and his widow, defendants 4 and 5 along with the erstwhile partners constituted themselves into a partnership firm under the same old name and took over all the assets and liabilities of the previous firm and continued with the bank the previous dealings ..... interest prevailing at that time and the advantages which the debtor would derive from the loan.a debtor would get relief under the usurious loans act only if it is established that the transaction is substantially an unfair one. it is true that the explanation introduced by the madras amendment has ..... (air 194? fc 57), patanjali sastri, j. (as he then was) held that'in order to be entitled to the benefit of the usurious loans act 1918, the appellant must establish.(1) that the interest payable on the loans is excessive; and(2) that the transaction was, as between the parties thereto, ..... for the appellants that ex facie the rate of interest charged is excessive and under explanation (1) to section 3(1) of the usurious loans act a presumption arises that the transaction was substantially unfair and the court is bound to reopen the transaction and relieve the debtor of the liability to ..... excessive rate without reference to the several circumstances enumerated in clauses (a), (b) and (c) of sub-section (2) of section 3 of the act.(4) in determining whether the rate is reasonable or not, the court has to take into consideration the following circumstances. (a) the value of the security .....

Tag this Judgment!


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