Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act Court: mumbai Year: 1970 Page 1 of about 18 results (0.026 seconds)

Feb 03 1970 (HC)

Santdas Moolchand Jhangiani and anr. Vs. Sheodayal Gurudasmal Massand

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Feb-03-1970

Reported in : AIR1971Bom237; (1971)73BOMLR42; ILR1971Bom457; 1970MhLJ419

..... provides for transfer of goodwill after dissolution and the consequent agreements in restraint of trade.9. it will be noticed from the above arrangement of chapter vi of the indian partnership act that matters pertaining not only to the fact of dissolution and fixing the date thereof but also matters arising out of the fact of dissolution which pertain to the winding ..... separate and distinct matters or they are accessory to the principal object of the instrument. taking into consideration the fact that the legislature itself in the indian partnership act has treated the winding up of partnership as a part of its dissolution and the principles laid down which are set out hereinabove, we have no hesitation in coming to the conclusion that the ..... various ways therein provided, whereas sections 46 to 55 related to winding up and not to dissolution. we, however, find that the entire chapter vi of the indian partnership act tom section 39 to section 55 has been included in the chapter heading 'dissolution of a firm'. the legislature obviously intended to make no distinction between dissolution as such ..... the leading object or are separate and distinct, must in india depend upon the provisions of the indian partnership act, 1932, and the bombay stamp act, 1958.8. chapter vi of the indian partnership act, 1932; deals with 'dissolution of a firm'. section 39 provides that the dissolution of partnership between all the partners of a firm is called the 'dissolution of the firm'. 'dissolution of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 04 1970 (HC)

Erandol Taluka Gramodyog, Utpadak Sahakari Society, Erandol Vs. Sunil ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Feb-04-1970

Reported in : AIR1971Bom91; (1970)72BOMLR620; (1970)6CompLJ212(Bom); 1970MhLJ923

..... and a decree was passed in its favour. when the decree was sought to be executed, the judgment-debtor objected on the ground that under section 69(2) of the indian partnership act a suit by an unregistered firm was not maintainable and, therefore, the decree passed in favour of such unregistered firm was a nullity. the patna high court held that:--'the ..... the subject-matter of the suit or over the parties to it.3. section 164 of the maharashtra co-operative societies act is mandatory in its terms just like section 3 of the limitation act or section 69(1) of the indian partnership act, 1932. what section 164 does is to require that the requisite notice should be given prior to the institution of the ..... in section 69(2) is only to the institution of the suit. the plea of non-maintainability of a suit, on behalf of an unregistered firm under section 69(2), partnership act, is, as such, not available to a judgment-debtor at the execution stage. such an objection should be taken in the suit itself before the passing of the decree. if ..... , has no jurisdiction to go behind such a decree.' the bar to maintainability of the suitenacted in section 69(2) of the partnership act is in language identical with that of section 164 of the maharashtra co-operative societies act. the material provisions of section 69(2) are:--'no suit to enforce a right arisingfrom a contract shall be instituted in any court .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 29 1970 (HC)

K.i. Suratwala and Co. Vs. Mahmud Bidi Works Sholapur and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Apr-29-1970

Reported in : AIR1972Bom238; (1972)74BOMLR131; ILR1972Bom317; 1972MhLJ340

..... at 9 per cent, per annum. they further contended that the plaintiffs had been over - paid and that the plaintiff firm was not registered under the indian partnership act, 1932, and therefore the suit was not maintainable. they also contended that ex. 42 was a bond and was not sufficiently stamped and was therefore not ..... instituted the suit for recovery of the said amount, interest and costs. the plaintiffs are a partnership firm and it has been proved that they were registered under the indian partnership act 1932. the defendants no. 1 are also a partnership firm. the defendant no. 2 is an admitted partner in the said firm. he is the ..... exhibited and used at the trial. under section 35 of the indian stamp act once a document is so admitted in evidence and used it cannot be thereafter questioned at any stage of the same proceedings or even in appeal. we ..... the evidence.22.the learned trial judge held that the agreement, ex. 42 was a bond, within the meaning of section 2(c) of the indian stamp act and was liable to be stamped with an ad valorem stamp duty due under art. 15. we, however, find that the document had already been ..... 42 bom lr 971, which brings out a distinction between a deposit and loan for the purposes of arts. 57, 59 and 60 of the indian limitation act, 1908. there the question was whether the amount was advanced was a deposit repayable on demand or a loan which must be repaid within 3 years .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 19 1970 (HC)

Mills Store Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City Ii

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jan-19-1970

Reported in : [1971]80ITR225(Bom)

..... .j.1. this is a reference under section 66(1) or the indian income-tax act, 1922. 2. messrs. mills store company, a partnership firm constituted of six partners, was carrying on business at karachi with branches, amongst other places, at bombay. as at the end of march, 1948, that partnership was dissolved and its accounts were made up. as from 1st april, 1948 ..... be referred to as 'the karachi firm'. as from 1st april, 1948, the three remaining partners took over the bombay business and continued it in the same old name in partnership with to new partners. this firm will be referred to as 'the assessee-firm'. 3. after these two new firms were formed there were numerous transaction between them. the income .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 06 1970 (HC)

Champion Engineering Works Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Mar-06-1970

Reported in : [1971]81ITR273(Bom)

..... india and four of the partners were authorised to operate on that account. these facts clearly indicate that the provisions of clause 12 of the instruments of partnership were not given effect to. 19. the cumulative effect of the findings aforesaid leads to the conclusion, in our view, that during the relevant year of ..... paid assistant 'without adequate cash remuneration for their wholetime service' and since in the then state of business their demands could not be satisfied the new partnership was being brought into existence. the taxing authorities below have found that these new partners even after the execution of the deed continued to draw the same ..... firm consisting of the above seven partners were claimed in the assessment for the year under appeal....' 15. the first clause of the deed of partnership is that the partnership shall be deemed to have commenced on and from the 1st january, 1959. it is apparent that both the gifts aforesaid were made after that date ..... some of the material terms of the deed which brought the partnership into existence. 20. for these reasons, our answer to the second part of question no. 1 is that the firm was not entitled to registration under section 26a of the indian income-tax act, 1922, for the assessment year 1960-61. 21. the ..... k.k. desai, j. 1. in this reference made under section 66 (1) of the indian income-tax act, 1922, the question of law arising for decision is as follows : 'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 18 1970 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City I Vs. Champaklal Dalsukhbhai

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Feb-18-1970

Reported in : [1971]81ITR293(Bom)

..... as representing his hindu undivided family. it is a matter of intention. there is, however, no express declaration as to intention in the deed of partnership of the fourth firm, nor in any other contemporaneous document when the fourth firm was started. the intention has, therefore, to be ascertained from subsequent ..... was a partner in the firm of messrs. chhaganlal kasturchand in his capacity as the karta and as representing his hindu undivided family. in that partnership capital had to be contributed and both these assessees contributed their shares of the capital from the monies belonging to their respective hindu undivided families. ..... mulchand, he being the assessee in that reference. 13. now, as stated earlier, the fourth firm was started in s. y. 2005. the partnership deed does not provide that any of the partners constituting that firm had to contribute anything by way of capital of the firm and in fact no ..... separate and was not thrown into the common hotchpot, nor even enjoyed by the hindu undivided family and further that there was nothing in the partnership deed of the fourth firm to show that champaklal was a partner in the firm in his capacity as a karta of the hindu undivided family ..... by a common judgment and the parties also have not objected to that procedure being adopted. both the reference are under section 66(2) of the indian income-tax act, 1922. 2. the question of law referred in the first reference is : 'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 10 1970 (HC)

Ebrahim Aboobaker Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City-i

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Feb-10-1970

Reported in : [1971]81ITR664(Bom)

..... property. in the meantime. aboobaker died on 14th may, 1950. aboobaker left him surviving his said three sons and a daughter, hawabai. the shares of the two sons in the partnership business had vested in the custodian of evacuee property as stated earlier, each of them having a 2/7th share. the assessee became entitled to a 2/7th share and ..... to as 'the first set of proceedings.' 5. after aboobaker died, the assessee, in exercise of the option to purchase aboobaker's interest in the partnership in the business deed, purchased aboobaker's interest in that partnership and thereafter continued to carry on the business as its sole proprietor. thereafter, the custodian, by his notice, dated the 31st may, 1950, called upon ..... evacuee property, bombay, in respect of hoosein and alimahomed, and, thereafter, on the 4th of august, 1949, aboobaker expelled hoosein and alimahomed from the partnership firm in pursuance of the provision contained clause 13 of the partnership dee. the business was thereafter continued by aboobaker and the assessee as the remaining partners. the shares of hoosein and alimahomed were thereafter declared to ..... mody, actg.c.j.1. this is a reference under section 66(1) of the indian income-tax act, 1922. 2. one aboobaker abdul rehman was the owner of a cinema theatre in bombay, known as the imperial cinema, and several other immovable properties. he also carried on the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 28 1970 (HC)

Expanded Metal Depot Private Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bomb ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Apr-28-1970

Reported in : [1971]80ITR483(Bom)

..... is a private limited company. the relevant assessment year is 1958-59, the corresponding, previous year being s. y. 2013, which ended on 22nd october, 1957. a partnership firm of the name of esoofally abdulhussein & expanded metal depot was carrying on business in zinc sheets and expanded metals. on the 1st of august, 1947, the firm dispatched ..... 's claim to the sum of rs. 19,867 (rupees nineteen thousand eight hundred and sixty seven only) is admissible under section 10(2)(xi) of the indian income-tax act ?' 6. the sum of rs. 19,867 mentioned in the question is the aggregate of the said two sums of rs. 17,617 and rs. 2, ..... , claimed that amount form the union of india. the union of india repudiated its liability on the ground that his was the liability of the pakistan government under the indian independence (rights, property and liabilities) order, 1947. on 24th january, 1951, the firm filed a suit, being suit no. 254 of 1951, in the city ..... of law. in the case before us there has been a change of ownership. the fact that the change of ownership has been brought about by an act inter vivos makes no difference as laid down in the case of the bombay hing supply company. although there has been a change of ownership of the business ..... mody, j.1. the question of law arising for consideration in this reference which is under section 66 (2) of the indian income-tax act, 1922, is a short one and it is so far as we are concerned, covered by a judgment of a division bench of this high court .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 03 1970 (HC)

Shah Prabhudas Gulabchand Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Feb-03-1970

Reported in : [1970]77ITR870(Bom)

..... was laid on the fact of daulat ram having with himself self-acquired separate property and he having invested a specific sum of rs. 48,000 for running the partnership business of the indian woollen textile mills. in connection with the question before them, the observation of their lordships was : 'in this view of the hindu law, it is clear that if ..... to become a working partner. in the context of these facts, it is impossible to proceed to decide the questions arising before as on the footing that chandrakant was acting as karta of the undivided family in the matter of the partnership agreement that was made between bhikibai and him. mr. mehta contends that chandrakant as a karta could always make a ..... the same party and such a contract was impossible of coming into existence and on that footing refusing to grant registration of the assessee-firm under section 26a of the act and accepting the finding of the income-tax officer that chandrakant was liable to be assessed in respect of the income of the above firm as hindu undivided family. 6 ..... ) on and from magsar sud 1st samvat year 2010 ....' 4. the first partnership firm that carried on business from october, 1943, to december, 1953, and this second partnership between bhikibai and chandrakant were granted registration under section 26a of the act and the firm was being assessed as a registered partnership up to the assessment year 1958-59. in connection with the assessment for .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 20 1970 (HC)

Western India Oil Distributing Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jan-20-1970

Reported in : [1970]77ITR140(Bom)

..... as a continuing security for all moneys, indebtedness and liabilities of the company to the financiers ......' 11. clause 21 provided: 'nothing herein contained shall create a partnership between the company and the financiers .....' under clause 22, the agreement was to be for 10 years from the date of the agreement. under clause 23, the ..... the extent of rs. 10,00,000, the company made the first agreement of finance dated august 29, 1953, with khushalbhai patel & sons, a partnership firm carrying on business in bombay. in connection with the arguments advanced on both sides, details of various clauses in the agreement will require to be noticed ..... shall as and when required by the financiers give anirrevocable power-of-attorney ..... to do and execute for and on behalf of the company all such acts, deeds and things as the financiers may require the company to do from opening letters of credit, clearing and selling the goods, endorsing insurance policies and ..... 5. from october, 1955, the company contended that the agreements were extortionate, unconscionable and illegal and offended the provisions of the bombay money lenders' act and the usurious loans act. on march 25, 1956, the company instituted suit no. 87 of 1956, inter alia, for a declarationthat the above three agreements and the power ..... k.k. desai, j. 1. in this reference under section 66(1) of the indian income-tax act, 1922, the question referred to us is as follows : 'whether the claim of the applicant to deduct the sum of rs. .....

Tag this Judgment!


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