Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act Court: kerala Year: 1960 Page 1 of about 7 results (0.030 seconds)

Jul 07 1960 (HC)

Rice and Oil Mills Partnership Firm Vs. Dy. Superintendent of Central ...

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Jul-07-1960

Reported in : 1981(8)ELT59(Ker)

..... to resolve this question for the disposal of these petitions, but in dealing with the above preliminary objection, the following' extract from the commentaries on indian partnership act by pollock and mulla, second eeition, page 410, may be usefully made.'in short, the firm is treated very much as if it were a ..... morarji goculdas v. alembic chemical works co. ltd- a.i.r. 1948 p.c. 100, the privy council observed, that:'the indian partnership act goes further than the english partership act, 1890, in recognising that a firm may possess a personality distinct from the persons constituting it, the law in india in that respect ..... a person, it would be liable for holding more than ten maunds. the definition of the word 'person' in section 3(42) of general clauses act, 1897, as including any 'association or body of individuals whether incorporated or not'' was adopted for holding, that 'a body of persons in general is ..... outside the scope and provisions of the notification and must be held to be illegal.3. it is not also necessary to consider whether respondent had acted without jurisdiction in issuing ext. p1 to p4(, or merely committed an error in the exercise of it. the learned counsel for the petitioners has ..... of the fundamental right, but that the notices issued, are alone the subject of challenge. if in applying the terms of the notification, the authority acts outside its scope, such action cannot be deemed to be in pursuance of a law, which is saved by article 19(6). it is plain, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 02 1960 (HC)

itty Kurian and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Dec-02-1960

Reported in : AIR1962Ker267

..... carried on by partner no. 1 for over 30 years. the said business was converted into a partnership business some time in 1954 and this partnership has been registered under the indian partnership act and the firm has also been continuing the business of banking.10. it is further stated that in ..... of section 49-a may be struck down.8. the petitioner in o. p. 1417/59 claims to be a partnership concern registered under the provisions of the indian partnership act on 12-3-55 and carrying on business at alleppey in the kerala state. it is also stated that partners nos. ..... national economy.46. the earliest enactment that dealt with the business of banking is the indian companies act 1913 -- act vii of 1913. section 4(1) was to the effect that no company, association or partnership consisting of more than 10 persons shall be formed for the purpose of carrying on ..... public for several years.'50. again, in paragraph 671 the report states:'.....we are of opinion that the existing provisions in the indian companies act governing banking companies, are inadequate.' several important matters haying a vital bearing on questions such as the intial organisation or banks, their efficient ..... that'there should be some legislative control over the operations of banking institutions which at present stand almost exclusively outside the purview of the indian companies act. in fact, the question of legislation for the regulation of banking has engaged the attention of the government of india and of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 16 1960 (HC)

Mathu Varkey Vs. Pyli Varghese

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Feb-16-1960

Reported in : AIR1960Ker286

..... for decision, is whether the latter part of the decree can be sustained, under section 69 of the indian partnership act, 1932, which may be referred to hereafter as the act, section 69, sub-sections (1) and (2) of the act have created a bar to certain classes of suits relating to an unregistered firm; but sub-section (3) ..... order xx, rule 15 of the civil procedure code must be amended, so as to give effect to the restricted interpretation of section 69 (3) (a) of the act, which is a later enactment. they held, that even in a suit for the dissolution of a firm in this restricted sense, an account has to be ..... for the taking of accounts is implicit in the prayer for the dissolution of a firm, within the meaning of section 69 (3) (a) of the act.3. the only case which has taken a contrary view and to which our attention has been drawn, is magan bchari lal v. ram partap singh, air ..... dissolved firm' within the meaning of section 69 (3) (a) can be laid. it may perhaps be suggested, that the object underlying section 69 of the act was to impose a certain disability on unregistered firm, and this is true to a certain extent; but it is fallacious to argue, that the same object permeates ..... contain, has furnished a definition as to its scope and content, and it is difficult to hold, that while enacting section 69 (3) (a) of the act, the legislature did not have before its mind, this provision in the civil procedure code in a chapter dealing with decrees.the lahore high court has ruled in jhandu mal .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 24 1960 (HC)

Sait Nagjee Purushotham and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras

Court : Kerala

Decided on : May-24-1960

Reported in : AIR1960Ker364

..... . the learned advocate-general, who has appeared for the assessee, has argued that the business carried on by the partnership of 1918, had been assessed to the tax under the indian income-tax act, 1918, that the same business had been continued till the private company was formed in february, 1948, and that ..... , in such a case, there is no devolution of the business as a whole. in that case, there was a partnership, which had paid tax under the act of 1918, the partnership at one time consisting of three partners.thereafter, there were several changes in 1924 one of the original partners went out, ..... -50, the assessee has claimed relief under section 25(4) of the indian income-tax act, hereinafter referred to as the act; and the facts, on which the claim was made, may be briefly stated.2. on 6-12-1918, a partnership deed was executed between six persons, five being related, and the sixth ..... vocation, on which tax was at any time charged under the provisions of the indian income-tax act, 1918, is succeeded in such capacity by another person, the change not being merely a change in the constitution of a partnership no tax shall be payable by the first mentioned person in respect of the ..... amalgamated in 1943, and that really amounted to succession by the newly constituted firm.the tribunal, therefore, held that the partnership of 1943 wag not an entity taxed under the income-tax act, 1918, and the benefit of section 25(4) cannot be given to the assessee. the asscssee claimed that a question .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 18 1960 (HC)

C.P. Krishna Iyer Vs. District Collector, Trichur and ors.

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Jul-18-1960

Reported in : AIR1961Ker315

..... assessment order on 23-12-1954 under section 23(3) of the income-tax act, 1922 determining the total income of the partnership firm at rs. 3,86,669/- the petitioner's share of the income being rs; 1,93,334/-. on appeal by the ..... the supreme court in t. k. musaliar v. venkitachalam, (s) air 1956 sc 246. that was a case where a petition was filed against the indian income-tax investigation commission having its office in new delhi and the official authorised by the commission to work in travancore under section 6 of the travancore taxation ..... -1957 informing him that 'according to the present policy of the government of india, indian citizens are not allowed to go to goa.' the said order is marked as ext. p9. on account of the above prohibitions and restrictions all the petitioner ..... request. true copies of the said letter and reply are marked ex. p8 series.the government of india have also imposed restrictions and prohibitions regarding travel of indian citizens to goa. on applying to the government of bombay state, for travel facilities to goa, the petitioner got a reply from them on 19-1 ..... the business in goa and had to leave large assets and amounts belonging to the business at goa without being able to take them over to the indian territories,2. for the assessment year 1950-51 corresponding to the account year ending on the 31st march 1950 the income-tax officer, bombay passed an .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 29 1960 (HC)

Kayiath Damodaran Vs. Induchoodan and ors.

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Jul-29-1960

Reported in : AIR1961Ker321; 1961CriLJ771

..... no. 80/1955, which is pending adjudication before the subordinate judge of tellicherry, and an interlocutory order had in the case been passed for production of the accounts of the partnership, of which the petitioner and the plaintiff in the case were partners.the petitioner claims to have, in compliance, produced account books in his possession of the aforesaid ..... partnership, that had been dissolved in 1953; and further avers that he was on october 21, 1959, summoned in the case to produce discharged bundles and some other account books relating ..... court: but the plaintiff of the civil suit filed a complaint before the district magistrate, sri v. t. chacko, complaining of offences under sections 406, 204 and 417 of the indian penal code, against the petitioner.the complainant prayed for search of the petitioner's office and premises for the recovery of any books and papers, that may be found there .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 18 1960 (HC)

Antherman Vs. Kannan

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Oct-18-1960

Reported in : AIR1961Ker130

..... firm without the consent of his co-partners, but the purchaser at the execution sale acquires the interest sold, with the right to have the partnership accounts taken in order to ascertain and realize its value,it seems to their lordships that the same principle may and ought to be applied ..... distinction may, and in some cases does, exist between them. it is sufficient to instance the seizure and sale of a share in a trading partnership at the suit of a separate creditor of one of the partners. the partner could not himself have sold his share so as to introduce a ..... .the power of voluntary alienation is not an inevitable corollary of the right to compulsory partition. the statement that the purpose of the madras marumakkathayam act, 1932, was to assimilate the marumakkathayam law as far as possible to the position under the mithakshara law also does not appear to be justified ..... it indirectly by importing into it an implied declaration of intention to divide''.11. in 34 cochin 522 (fb), section 38 of the madras marumakkathayam act, 1932, came up for specific consideration. the court surveyed the madras and cochin cases and said ;'so far as the division claimable by a thavazhi ..... (air 1961 kerala 105), a full bench of this court adopted the unanimous view of the indian high courts in respect of compulsory alienations under the hindu law in a case governed by the travancore kshatriya act of 1108. the question of voluntary alienations of undivided shares did not arise for decision in that .....

Tag this Judgment!

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