Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act Court: mumbai Year: 1999 Page 1 of about 32 results (0.101 seconds)

Nov 08 1999 (HC)

M/S. Trishul Steels Vs. the Municipal Corporation of the City of Auran ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Nov-08-1999

Reported in : 2000(1)ALLMR592; 2000(2)BomCR140; (2000)2BOMLR466; 2000(1)MhLj529

..... orderb.h. marlapalle, j.1. the petitioner is a partnership firm registered under the indian partnership act, 1932 and was running a factory located ate-4, m.i.d.c. industrial area, chikalthana, aurangabad. the factory was ..... petitioner at aurangabad do not amount to an activity of manufacture. there is no dispute that the petitioner's factory is registered under the factories act, 1948 and it is carrying out manufacturing activities. we therefore, have no difficulty in holding that the material that is exported by the petitioner ..... therein. sub-section (7) of section 457 of the corporations act has empowered the corporation to make rules in respect of the assessment and recovery of taxes and accordingly the corporation has framed octroi rules under the ..... petitioner did not satisfy the requirements of rule 16(e) of the octroi rules.2. the octroi is imposed under section 147 of the corporations act on all the goods imported into the city for the purpose of consumption, use or sale therein unless they are imported for immediate exportation as provided ..... the petitioner therefore, claimed refund of octroi under rule 16 as framed under sections 454 and 457 of the bombay provincial municipal corporation act, 1949 (for short corporations act) and the claim of the petitioner was turned down by the corporation contending that the processed material exported outside the municipal corporation limits .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 18 1999 (HC)

M/S. Hira Mistan Vs. Rustom Jamshedji Noble and Others

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Sep-18-1999

Reported in : 2000(2)ALLMR618; 2000(1)BomCR716

..... defendant nos. 1 to 10.5. based on the pleadings the following issues have been framed :--1) whether the plaintiffs firm is registered under the indian partnership act, 1932 as alleged in para 1 of the plaint ? 2) whether the original defendant nos. 1 to 10 orally agreed to sell the immoveable ..... contents of the said documents have not been proved. however, oral evidence can be considered, considering proviso 2 to section 92 of the indian evidence act which permits leading of oral or parole evidence regarding the existence of any separate oral agreement as to any matter on which a document is ..... floor of noble building which was not referred to in the agreement in writing. this is because considering sections 91 and 92 of the indian evidence act once parties have reduced their agreement into writing then by virtue of section 92 no evidence either contemporaneous, subsequent or earlier can be permitted ..... though those contents may not be conclusive evidence.18. we then come to the judgment in so far as sections 91 and 92 of the indian evidence act are concerned. in the case of hitchings & coulthurst company v. northern leather company of america and doushkess, 1914 k.b. 907, the ..... can evidence be led in respect of the said agreement requiring handing over of possession of properties aforementioned, considering sections 91 and 92 of the indian evidence act ? (f) was it a term of the oral contract that earnest money would only be deposited if the letter of possession was handed over .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 14 1999 (HC)

Namdeo Vyankatrao Dhande Vs. Narayan Anatrao Bonde

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Oct-14-1999

Reported in : (2000)102BOMLR201

..... by the defendant in the written statement about the maintainability of the suit for want of registration of firm, in view of the provisions of section 69(2a) of the indian partnership act, 1932, which was obtaining on the date of framing of issues, the trial court framed issue no. 1 to the effect whether the suit was maintainable for want of registration ..... only question involved in the first appeal is whether the trial court was justified in dismissing the plaintiffs suit as not maintainable relying on section 69(2-a) of the indian partnership act, 1932.2. the appellant is the original plaintiff. he filed a suit on 14.1.1980 against the respondent, who is the original defendant in the suit, inter alia praying ..... want of registration. it was only during the pendency of the suit by maharashtra act xxix of 1984, called indian partnership (maharashtra amendment) act, 1984, various provisions of the indian partnership act were amended, including section 69. section 1 of maharashtra act xxix of 1984 provides for short title and commencement of the act by providing that it shall come into force on such date as the state government ..... plaintiff seeking dissolution of the firm and rendition of account and for ancillary reliefs on 14.1.1980. on the date of filing of the suit section 69 of the indian partnership act, 1932, read thus:-69. effect of non-registration.(1) no suit to enforce aright arising from a contract of conferred by this .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 09 1999 (HC)

Mahesh Kantilal Shah and Others Vs. Shishir Chhotalal Shah and Others

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Sep-09-1999

Reported in : AIR2000Bom157; 1999(4)ALLMR584; 2000(1)BomCR442; (2000)2BOMLR220; 2000(2)MhLj136

..... to share profits.'4. law is well-settled that the mode of settlement of accounts between the parties set out in section 48 of the indian partnership act is subject to agreement by the parties. the parties may agree that the mode prescribed by section 48 need not be followed with regard ..... case the award is vitiated because of non-compliance of the provisions of section 48 of the indian partnership act, 1932. the learned counsel submits that the umpire failed to take into consideration section 48 of the indian partnership act and effect of non-compliance of the same.3. we have carefully considered the above submissions ..... the above submission of the appellants. he however, found that there was no non-compliance of section 48 of the indian partnership act because the appellant had himself agreed to settlement of accounts by a mode different than the one set out in section 48. section 48 of ..... the indian partnership act reads as follows:'48. mode of settlement of accounts between partners.-in setting the accounts of a firm after dissolution, the following ..... the supreme court in asandas mitharam narsinghani v. tekchand mitharam sevakramani, 1993(3) s.c.c. 110 the supreme court held:'section 48 of the act prescribes the mode of settlement of accounts betweenthe parties. the section, however, states that the mode prescribedtherein is 'subject to agreement by the parties', in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 09 1999 (HC)

Mahesh Kantilal Shah and ors. Vs. Shishir Chhotalal Shah and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Oct-09-1999

Reported in : (2000)102BOMLR220

..... submits that in the instant case the award is vitiated because of non-compliance of the provisions of section 48 of the indian partnership act, 1932. the learned counsel submits that the umpire failed to take into consideration section 48 of the indian partnership act and effect of non-compliance of the same.3. we have carefully considered the above submissions. we have perused the award ..... rejecting the arbitration petition. the learned single judge has considered the above submission of the appellants. he however, found that there was no non-compliance of section 48 of the indian partnership act because the appellant had himself agreed to settlement of accounts by a mode different than the one set out in section 48. section 48 of the ..... as follows:4. law is well-settled that the mode of settlement of accounts between the parties set out in section 48 of the indian partnership act is subject to agreement by the parties. the parties may agree that the mode prescribed by section 48 need not be followed with regard to settlement of accounts between the ..... partners.5. identical controversy came up before the supreme court in asandas mitharam narsinghani v. tekchand mitharam sevakramani : air1999sc3802 . the supreme court held:section 48 of the act prescribes the mode of settlement of accounts between the parties. the section, however, states that the mode prescribed therein is 'subject to agreement by the parties', in other words, the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 05 1999 (TRI)

Assistant Commissioner of Vs. Associated Builders

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Decided on : Feb-05-1999

Reported in : (2000)72ITD273(Mum.)

..... at the time of dissolution only when there is no agreement or contract between the partners to the contrary, which is also the position recognised sky section 48 of the indian partnership act. therefore our decision is applicable equally to capital assets as well as stack-in-trade, provided there is a contract between the partners to value them at the time of ..... revenue authorities to discard the same and seek to tax the profit on the notional footing of the market price. in this connection the provisions of section 48 of the indian partnership act were also relied upon as also the order of the madras bench of the tribunal in ito v. preetham pipe syndicate [1993] 44 itd 665. as regards the existence of ..... the partners, the market value can be adopted for assessment purposes. in n. muhammad ussain sahib's case (supra) the question arose under section 48 of the partnership act. now section 48 of the partnership act provides for the mode of settlement of accounts between partners upon dissolution. the section provides for certain rules which are expressly stated to be subject to agreement by ..... absence of an agreement between the partners to the contrary, they can be valued on the basis of the market value at the time of dissolution. section 48 of the partnership act in fact clarifies or makes the position very clear.11. the other reason as to why it is difficult to understand the judgment of the supreme court as laying down .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 20 1999 (TRI)

Kalanidhi and anr. Vs. Cce

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Decided on : Jan-20-1999

Reported in : (1999)(82)LC417Tri(Mum.)bai

..... unit.14. virtually the same line of argument has been taken by the second appellant m/s. colour prints who have mentioned, inter alia, that they were a partnership firm registered under the indian partnership act since 21.9.1966 and shri gopal ram salian and shri k. ugappa malli were partners of the firm since its inception. apart from being registered by other ..... ), my views and orders in the matter are as follows.11. it is observed that the appellants m/s kalanidhi have mentioned, inter alia, that they were a partnership firm registered in the indian partnership act since 14.10.1972 and engaged in the manufacture of printed cartons, labels etc. shri gopal ram salian and smt. k. rajani ugappa malli are the partners of ..... other. in these circumstances, jdr contended that the adjudicating officer had rightly concluded that the separate registration for purposes of sales tax and income tax and separate registration of the partnership firms was only to camouflage the actual fact that both the entities were, in fact, one and the same. he referred to the recent decision of the tribunal step cosmetic ..... the department.the ld. advocate contended that m/s. kalanidhi and m/s. colour prints were separate and independent partnership firms. m/s. kalanidhi were registered under the income tax act, bombay sales tax act, central sales tax act and the shops and the establishment act and had separate bank account. m/s. colour prints were likewise holder of central excise licence for the manufacture .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 27 1999 (HC)

Mumbai Mazdoor Sangh Vs. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Oct-27-1999

Reported in : [2000(84)FLR764]; (2000)ILLJ1225Bom

..... i), maharashtra and goa under section 7-a of the employees' provident funds and miscellaneous provisions act, 1952, hereinafter referred to as 'the act'.2. facts giving rise to this petition are that the 2nd respondent is a partnership firm duly registered under the indian partnership act. since last 125 years the firm has been engaged in 'trading and commerce activities', having its ..... office at princess street, mumbai. respondent no. 2 is duly registered under the bombay shops and establishments act. this establishment, hereinafter for brevity's sake, is described ..... trading activity for several years. the mere fact that respondent no. 2 ultimately consolidated the accounts of the two units, for the purposes of the companies act and the income-tax act, cannot result in a conclusion that, therefore, the two units constitute one establishment. it is not unknown that where one and the same company establishes separate ..... i am of the opinion that respondent no. 1, has rightly come to the conclusion that the two units are two separate establishments. section 2-a of the act makes the expression 'establishment' as embracing departments or branches of an establishment irrespective of where they are located. thus a difference in location of different departments and branches, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 19 1999 (HC)

M. Sreenivasulu Reddy and ors. Vs. Kishore R. Chhabria and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Apr-19-1999

Reported in : [2002]109CompCas18(Bom)

..... kerala high court in krishna menon v. narayana ayyar, : air1962ker21 . that was a case where there was no provision making a contract of partnership in contravention of section 22 of the cochin abkari act expressly void. yet the court held that the agreement was calculated to defeat the object of enactment and it would be void under section 24 thereof ..... impossible to reach a proper conclusion.' in the same line of propositions, mr. manohar cited the following judgments : (1) bijendra nath srivastava v. mayank srivastava : air1994sc2562 ; (2) svenska handelsbanken v. indian charge chrome : air1994sc626 ; (3) omar salay mohamed sait v. cit : [1959]37itr151(sc) ; (4) varanasaya sanskrit vishwavidyalaya v. rajkishore tripathi, : (1977)illj85sc ; (5) abubakar abdul inamdar v. harun ..... vary according to the circumstances of each case.' 131. the learned judges referred to the definitions of 'proved', 'disproved' and 'not proved' in section 3 of the indian evidence act and in terms held that woodroffe j., was wrong in insisting that such charges must be proved clearly and beyond reasonable doubt. in para. 11, the supreme court observed ..... as follows (p. 1738) :'it is apparent from the above definitions that the indian evidence act applies the same standard of proof in all civil cases. it makes no difference between cases in which charges of a fraudulent or criminal character are made and cases in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 09 1999 (HC)

The Talmakiwadi Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. Vs. the Divisional J ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Nov-09-1999

Reported in : 1999(1)ALLMR389; 1999(1)BomCR393

..... see : (1974)76bomlr375 . reversing the decision of this court, the apex court held that the flat in a tenant co-partnership housing society registered under the maharashtra act was liable to attachment and sale in execution of a decree against the member in whose favour or for whose benefit the same has ..... be a member having regard to the principles of open membership. broadly speaking, an individual who is competent to enter into a contract under the indian contract act, 1872, is eligible to become a member; subject of course, to certain exceptions carved out in section 22 itself. under section 23 refusal to ..... be admitted as a member of society except the following, that is to say: (a) an individual, who is competent to contract under the indian contract act, 1872, (b) a firm, company or any other body corporate constituted under any law for the time being in force, or a society registered ..... bank ltd. indore and another v. state of madhya pradesh and others. misc. petition no. 626 of 1973 decided on 6th november, 1979. indian co-operative cases 1960-1990 volume iii page 1, a division bench of madhya pradesh high court considered the question as to whether the order of ..... saraswat community. under the amendment, as directed, it has been provided that: (a) a person who is competent to enter into contract under the indian contract act, 1872 would be eligible to become a member subject to his fulfilling certain requirements; (b) a minor or a person of unsound mind, inheriting share .....

Tag this Judgment!


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