Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act Court: delhi Year: 2013 Page 1 of about 88 results (0.089 seconds)

Feb 21 2013 (HC)

Mukesh Gupta and ors Vs. Daljeet Singh Uberoi

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Feb-21-2013

..... only of roop pal uberoi and harpal singh uberoi. the petitioners have filed on record form-a, register of firm maintained under section 9 of the indian partnership act where name of the partners have been shown as roop pal uberoi and harpal singh uberoi. date of registration is 07.02.1992. the respondent did ..... that he continued to be the partner in the said firm. in his statement as cw-1 recorded on 04.08.2008, he admitted that the partnership-deed showed only two partners. surprisingly, the respondent did not implead his brothers r.p.uberoi and h.s.uberoi as accused. he did not lodge ..... in 1996 to ramesh chander and necessary documents were executed in his favour on 11.03.1996 by roop pal uberoi and harpal singh uberoi. the partnership firm m/s roop pal and brothers consisted only of roop pal uberoi and harpal singh uberoi. an information was given to dsidc on 28.01. ..... . he with his brothers r.p.uberoi and h.s.uberoi formed a partnership in the name and style of m/s roop pal & brothers. the industrial plot was allotted to m/s roop pal and brothers in 1990. construction ..... it reveals that the respondent filed complaint case against the petitioners for committing offences under sections 420/468/470/471/420b read with section 378/447/446 ipc. the respondent alleged that he and his two brothers applied for an industrial plot with delhi state industrial development corporation (for short dsidc) in 1976-1977 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 01 2013 (HC)

Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Sanguine Technical Publishers ...

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Jul-01-2013

..... of respondent nos. 2 and 3. it is also pertinent to note that there was no public notice under sub-section (3) of section 32 of the indian partnership act by respondent nos. 2 and 3. even if there was a public notice, it may not alter the position as the alleged liabilities of respondent nos. ..... observed thus: respondent nos. 2 and 3 have contended that the appellant was aware of the dissolution of the partnership but that by itself will not absolve the liability of the retiring partners. section 32 of the indian partnership act, 1932, reads as follow:"32 retirement of a partner. (1) a partner may retire:(a) with the ..... consent off all the other partners. (b) in accordance with the express agreement by the partners, or (c) where the partnership is at will, by giving notice in writing ..... respondent no. 4 after his resignation and thus the respondent no. 4s rights are to be treated as per the provisions of the partnership act, 1932.41. it is well settled principle of law that the retired partner shall not be discharged from the liability any third party for the ..... the firm after the third party has the knowledge about the retirement. this is evident from the provisions of section 32 of the partnership act, 1932.42. the supreme court of india has approved this principle of liability of the retired partner towards the third party for the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 10 2013 (HC)

Shri Satish Kumar Jhunjhunwala Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Oct-10-2013

..... has failed to appear: provided that nothing in this sub-rule shall be deemed to limit or otherwise affect the provisions of section 30 of the indian partnership act, 1932 (9 of 1932). (2) where the decree-holder claims to be entitled to cause the decree to be executed against any person ..... between the judgement-debtor firm and the union of india, such that in consonance with the general principle laid out in section 25 of the partnership act he can be made personally liable. accordingly, unless the claim of the decreeholder that the decree should be passed against the partners personally has ..... referred to provisions efa (os) 36/2013 page 12 of section 32(2) of the partnership act, which provides that a retiring partner may be discharged from any liability to a third party for acts of the firm done before his retirement by an agreement made by him with such third party ..... learned single judge, nor in the present appeal proceedings has mr. jhunjhunwala raised any questions as to this document, or even generally as to his partnership at the time of signing the contract, and thus, his liability.12. rather, the primary argument put forward by mr. jhunjhunwala is that the ..... this court is established. further, learned counsel submits that the judgment-debtor firm named mr. jhunjunwala, the appellant/petitioner, as a partner in the partnership deed submitted to the railway board vide letter dated 11.05.1987 at the time of awarding the contract. moreover, in similar terms, the judgement-debtor .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 31 2013 (HC)

Cico Technologies Ltd. Vs. M/S Shriram Enterprises and ors.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : May-31-2013

..... the partnership deed (which has not been put on record) did not give implicit consent for a partner to represent the firm. therefore, the argument is that, since only ..... 8(2) of the act. he relied upon n.radhakrishnan vs. maestro engineers, (2010) 1 scc 72.to substantiate his claim that a reference to arbitration cannot be made if the procedural requirements (of filing the original arbitration agreement) have not been satisfied.17. the final argument of the learned counsel for the respondents is hinged on the indian partnership act. he argued that ..... (iii) 5. b-9, rajouri garden, new delhi-110027. shop nos.23 and 24, vashist complex, m.g.road, sikander pur, gurgaon-122002 (haryana). admittedly, respondent no.1 is a partnership firm. respondents no.2 & 3 are the partners of respondent no.1 who have acknowledged the delivery of the goods. the respondents have also not denied the outstanding amount dues ..... in both the matters are common, thus, the same are being disposed of with single order.2. the petitioner and respondent no.1, m/s shriram enterprises, which is a partnership firm, entered into a distributorship agreement dated 5th november, 2009 for the supply of water proofing chemicals. as per the agreement, the respondents would submit purchase orders, which would be .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 31 2013 (HC)

Cico Technologies Ltd. Vs. M/S Shriram Enterprises and ors.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : May-31-2013

..... the partnership deed (which has not been put on record) did not give implicit consent for a partner to represent the firm. therefore, the argument is that, since only ..... 8(2) of the act. he relied upon n.radhakrishnan vs. maestro engineers, (2010) 1 scc 72.to substantiate his claim that a reference to arbitration cannot be made if the procedural requirements (of filing the original arbitration agreement) have not been satisfied.17. the final argument of the learned counsel for the respondents is hinged on the indian partnership act. he argued that ..... (iii) 5. b-9, rajouri garden, new delhi-110027. shop nos.23 and 24, vashist complex, m.g.road, sikander pur, gurgaon-122002 (haryana). admittedly, respondent no.1 is a partnership firm. respondents no.2 & 3 are the partners of respondent no.1 who have acknowledged the delivery of the goods. the respondents have also not denied the outstanding amount dues ..... in both the matters are common, thus, the same are being disposed of with single order.2. the petitioner and respondent no.1, m/s shriram enterprises, which is a partnership firm, entered into a distributorship agreement dated 5th november, 2009 for the supply of water proofing chemicals. as per the agreement, the respondents would submit purchase orders, which would be .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 22 2013 (HC)

Babita Pathak and Others Vs. High Court of Delhi and Others

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Feb-22-2013

..... , flair in english, knowledge of objective type legal problems and their solutions covering constitution of india, code of civil procedure, code of criminal procedure, indian penal code, contract act, partnership act, principles governing arbitration law, evidence act, specific relief act and limitation act will be included. minimum qualifying marks in the preliminary examination shall be 60% for general and 55% for reserved categories i.e. ..... (dead) through lrs & others:2010. (1) scc 756.16. in national federation of blind (supra), a division bench of this court held as under:16. the disabilities act was enacted for protection of the rights of the disabled in various spheres like education, training, employment and to remove any discrimination against them in the sharing of development benefits ..... disabilities as also to ensure equal opportunities and protection of the rights of full participation of such persons. that being the case, it was submitted that the said act ought to be given a liberal, purposive and constructive interpretation in favour of the persons with disabilities. for this proposition, he placed reliance on bata india ltd v ..... up by the candidates of general category which would include the petitioners.11. mr datar, appearing on behalf of the high court of delhi, submitted that the said act being a beneficial / welfare legislation enacted to benefit the persons with disabilities had been enacted with the object and purpose of giving effect to the proclamation on the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 22 2013 (HC)

Deepti Vs. High Court of Delhi and Others

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Feb-22-2013

..... , flair in english, knowledge of objective type legal problems and their solutions covering constitution of india, code of civil procedure, code of criminal procedure, indian penal code, contract act, partnership act, principles governing arbitration law, evidence act, specific relief act and limitation act will be included. minimum qualifying marks in the preliminary examination shall be 60% for general and 55% for reserved categories i.e. ..... (dead) through lrs & others:2010. (1) scc 756.16. in national federation of blind (supra), a division bench of this court held as under:16. the disabilities act was enacted for protection of the rights of the disabled in various spheres like education, training, employment and to remove any discrimination against them in the sharing of development benefits ..... disabilities as also to ensure equal opportunities and protection of the rights of full participation of such persons. that being the case, it was submitted that the said act ought to be given a liberal, purposive and constructive interpretation in favour of the persons with disabilities. for this proposition, he placed reliance on bata india ltd v ..... up by the candidates of general category which would include the petitioners.11. mr datar, appearing on behalf of the high court of delhi, submitted that the said act being a beneficial / welfare legislation enacted to benefit the persons with disabilities had been enacted with the object and purpose of giving effect to the proclamation on the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 04 2013 (HC)

Zameer Ahmad and ors. Vs. State

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Sep-04-2013

..... . m.a.no. 8195/2013 the appellants seek compounding of the offences punishable under section 147/148/307 ipc read with 149 ipc and in case of appellant babu khan section 27 arms act as well.2. in the appeal the appellants challenge the judgment dated 28 th january, 2003 convicting them ..... sentence of the appellant babu khan.10. a perusal of the decision in gian singh (supra) shows that though an offence under section 307 ipc was not mentioned to be the one for which fir could not be quashed, however guidelines were laid down for the courts on the basis ..... learned counsel for the appellants has stressed that the other appellants were not aware that babu khan was holding a pistol and thus section 34 ipc is not attracted. this contention is fallacious. a perusal of testimony of pw1 meharban ali shows that babu khan was holding a katta in his ..... them.4. learned app on the other hand contends that in the present case the appellants have been convicted for offence under section 307 ipc read with section 149 ipc. the allegation is of inflicting a gunshot injury and in view of seriousness of the offence, no quashing/ compounding can be permitted. ..... of corruption act or the offences committed by public servants while working in that capacity, the settlement between the offender and the victim can have no legal sanction at all. however, certain offences which overwhelmingly and predominantly bear civil flavour having arisen out of civil, mercantile, commercial, financial, partnership or such like .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 21 2013 (HC)

M/S Hansa Electricals and ors. Vs. D.N.Wadhwa (Deceased) Through Lrs

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Nov-21-2013

..... , in the dissolution deed/agreement dated 31st march, 1991, agreed to the amounts specified therein only being due to him on account of the erstwhile partnership, was es-stopped from claiming the sum of rs.4,40,000/- also to be due on that account. attention is drawn to para 3 ..... 40,000/- rfa no.149/2005 had also been agreed to be paid by appellants/defendants to him in settlement of the accounts of the erstwhile partnership but had been returned dishonoured; (v) that the appellants/defendants contested the suit, by not disputing the issuance of the said cheque of rs. ..... mr. hans raj kapur and mr. rakesh kapur opting to continue the partnership business; (iii) that two documents i.e. dissolution deed and an agreement, both dated 31st march, 1991 were executed by the parties in this regard ..... respondent was a partner in the appellant/defendant no.1 along with the appellants/defendants no.2 & 3 for nearly 31 years; (ii) that the said partnership firm was dissolved with effect from 31st march, 1991, with the deceased respondent / plaintiff opting to retire therefrom and the appellants/defendants no.2 & 3 namely ..... scope for pleading any further liability of the appellants / defendants. reliance before the trial court in this regard was placed on section 92 of the indian evidence act, 1872.16. i am however of the view that the presumption under section 118 supra, in the facts of the present case, cannot be .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 30 2013 (HC)

Man Mohan Batra and anr. Vs. Citizen Electronics Pvt. Ltd.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Oct-30-2013

..... partners. (c) on 22nd july, 1985, the respondent company was incorporated under the provision of the companies act, 1956 and took over all the assets and liabilities of the said partnership business including the trade mark citizen . the petitioner no.1, umesh batra and deepa batra were promoters and directors of ..... of m/s citizen electronics with a trade mark citizen . (b) in 1984, the petitioner no.1 converted the said sole proprietorship business into partnership business with the same trade mark and under the same name and style along with his brother, umesh batra and sister-in-law, deepa batra as ..... constitution of india against the order dated 28th february, 2013 passed by the learned additional district judge whereby an application under section 45 of the indian evidence act, 1872 read with section 151 of the code of civil procedure, 1908 has been dismissed.2. the relevant facts were as under :- (a ..... original minutes book was lost in 2007.3. the petitioner no.1 filed an application before the learned court under section 45 of the indian evidence act, praying that the page numbers in the said fabricated minutes book be verified through forensic science laboratory.4. the above said application was ..... of cfsl as the petitioner cannot directly approach the cfsl. c) in case the prayer made in the application under section 45 of the evidence act, 1872 is not allowed, it would definitely affect the case of the petitioner on merit. therefore, in the interest of justice, equity and fair .....

Tag this Judgment!


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