Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2009SC1858; 2009(3)BomCR790; 2009BusLR397(SC); JT2009(4)SC212; 2009(4)SCALE459; (2009)5SCC608; 2009(4)LC1712(SC); 2009AIRSCW3329; 2009(5)SCC608
..... that suit a defence taken was that the suit was not maintainable in view of sub-section (2a) of section 69 of the indian partnership act, 1932 (hereinafter referred to as `the act'). the bombay city civil court was of the view that the said sub-section 2a, which was introduced by the maharashtra amendment to ..... the english law in so far as it makes registration compulsory for a firm and imposes a penalty for non-registration was not followed when the partnership act was made in india in 1932 as it was considered that this step would be too drastic and would introduce several difficulties. hence registration was made ..... (3)(a) to section 69 by an altogether different sub-section (3)(a).8. the original sub-section (3)(a) of section 69 in the partnership act read as follows:(3) the provisions of sub-sections (1) and (2) shall apply also to a claim of set-off or other proceeding to enforce ..... court, however, in the impugned judgment has held that the said sub-section 2a of section 69 of the act is not unconstitutional. hence this appeal before us.5. section 69(1) & (2) of the partnership act originally read as follows:69. effect of non-registration. (1) no suit to enforce a right arising from ..... sue for accounts or for its dissolution or for realizing their property in the firm.14. it may be mentioned that a partnership firm, unlike a company registered under the indian companies act, is not a distinct legal entity, and is only a compendium of its partners. even the registration of a firm does .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2007(1)AWC878(SC); 2006(2)CTLJ269(SC); JT2007(4)SC564; (2007)1MLJ623(SC); 2006(12)SCALE232; 2006AIRSCW5898
..... impugned judgment and order of april 10, 1992 allowed the appeal and dismissed the suit holding that in view of the provisions of section 69(2) of the indian partnership act (hereinafter referred to as the 'act'), the suit was not maintainable, the plaintiff being an unregistered firm.2. the facts of the case are not in dispute and they will be briefly noticed ..... it.15. in haldiram bhujiawala and anr. (supra) this court noticed the recommendations made by the special committee in its report which was considered by the legislature while enacting the partnership act, 1932. the committee recommended that registration of firms be made optional as it considered making registration compulsory too drastic for a beginning in india. it was proposed that registration should ..... paper mart' as the sole proprietor of the concern. during this period he supplied goods to the defendant firm namely - shivraj fine arts litho works, a firm registered under the partnership act. defendants 2 to 9 were the partners of the said firm. in the year 1974, special civil suit no. 9 of 1974 was filed for dissolution of the defendant ..... and anr. v. bhaskara krishnappa (d) and ors. : 3scr400 this court held:it seems to us that looking to the scheme of the indian act no other view can reasonably be taken. the whole concept of partnership is to embark upon a joint venture and for that purpose to bring in as capital money or even property including immovable property. once that .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Reported in : 2006(3)ARBLR152(Delhi); IV(2006)BC289; 131(2006)DLT341; 2006(90)DRJ293
..... registration is a mandatory pre-condition for the institution of a suit or other proceeding as contemplated under section 69(2) and (3) of the indian partnership act, 1932. if on the date of institution of the suit or proceeding, the firm is not registered, subsequent registration during the pendency of the ..... 69 were substantive provisions intended to discourage non-registration of firms. it also held that the provisions of section 69(2) of the indian partnership act, 1932 were mandatory and make the registration of a firm a condition precedent to the institution of a suit of the nature mentioned therein. obviously, ..... ors. air 1978 del 92, wherein the said division bench had taken the view that the point of time contemplated in section 69(2) of the indian partnership act, 1932 was the time of institution of the suit. the division bench had taken the view that sub-sections (1) and (2) of section ..... the partners inter se or between the partners and firms for the purpose of enforcing a right arising from a contract or conferred by the indian partnership act unless the same is registered and the person suing is or has been shown in the register of firms as a partner in the firm ..... 3 are the partners of the said firm. according to the learned counsel for the respondent in view of the provisions of section 69 of the indian partnership act, 1932, the effect of non-registration of the petitioner no. 1 firm would be that it would be barred from instituting the present petition. the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kerala
Reported in : 120ITR644(Ker)
..... state that all contracts between a person a, and a and others would be invalid. reference may be made in this connection to the provisions of section 46 of the indian partnership act, 1932, where a partner may enforce as against the firm of which he is a partner certain contractual rights by means of a suit (without dissolution), whereas others can only ..... shri k.s. krishnadas as their representative to carry on the business of partnership by their power-of-attorney. shri k. s. krishnadas joined the document of ..... three sons as representatives of his estate, who were to carry on the partnership in his place along with the other partners in the original deed. this was quite permissible and quite consistent with the provisions of clause 13 of the partnership deed as well as section 37 of the indian partnership act. in accordance with the devolution of interest, the three heirs had constituted ..... that the surviving or continuing partners could carry on the business of the firm with the estate of the deceased partner, so that section 37 of the partnership act would have been attracted if this fresh partnership had not been executed, and that the position was directly covered by the decision of the bombay high court in cit v. raghavji anandji and co .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kerala
Reported in : 132ITR497(Ker)
..... that 'in the other respects, not hereunder expressly provided for, the rights and liabilities of the firm as well as among the partners inter se, shall be governed by the indian partnership act'. the minors attained majority on december 26, 1963, august 28, 1966, august 14, 1967, and february 23, 1969, respectively, during the relative assessment years 1965-66, 1967-68, 1968-69 ..... ' means a person by whom agricultural income-tax is payable and under section 2(m) 'person' means, inter alia, a firm. section 2(k) states that 'firm' 'partner' and 'partnership' have the same meanings respectively as in the indian partnership act, 1932, and that the expression 'partner' shall also include any person who being a minor has been admitted to the benefits of the ..... partnership. section 18(5)(a) provides that when the total income of a registered firm has been assessed, the sum payable by the firm itself shall not be determined but the ..... laxmi narain v. cit : 68itr696(all) was a case under section 26a, indian i.t. act, 1922, and it supports the conclusion of the commissioner. it was held in that case that while under the partnership act it was not necessary for a minor on attaining majority to execute a partnership deed along with the existing partners as he would be deemedto have become .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kerala
Reported in : 96ITR348(Ker)
..... that judgment. we shall extract a paragraph from that judgment :' the question is not whether there is any rule of law discernible either from section 13(b) of the indian partnership act, 1932, or from any general principle from which it is possible to discern the proportion in which the losses should be shared but as to whether section 184 insists ..... partners to third parties '. though the wording in clause 15 of the partnership deed is not very clear as to what are the provisions of the indian partnership act that are intended to be made applicable it may not be unreasonable to construe that clause to refer to chapters iii and iv of ..... avaran koya. 25% ............................. 15. in matters wherein no specific mention is made hereunder, the provisions of the indian partnership act, 1932, shall prevail with respect to the relationship between the partners and the firm and third parties.' 3. chapter iii of the indian partnership act, 1932 (for short ' the act ') deals with ' relations of partners to one another ' and chapter iv thereof deals with ' relations of ..... the partnership act. so construed, the provisions in the act dealing with 'relations of partners to one another' will be attracted. the provisions in section .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kerala
Reported in : 204ITR141(Ker)
..... for abdulla koya, husbandof smt. kadishabi. from the statements of smt. kadishabi and smt. ayishabi, it is clear that a partnership as contemplated under section 4 of the indian partnership act has not been constituted.5. the definition of partnership in section 4 of the indian partnership act contains three elements, viz., (i) there must be an agreement entered into by all the partners concerned, (ii) the agreement ..... refused for that reason. furthermore, the assessing officer has found the partnership deed to be not genuine which finding was confirmed by the appellate assistant commissioner ..... with the business as stated by them, a partnership as defined in section 4 of the act is not constituted.6. only a partnership firm is entitled to present an application for registration under section 184(1) of the income-tax act, 1961. since the firm constituted by annexure-d is not a partnership as defined under the indian partnership act, the request for registration has to be .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kerala
Reported in : II(2003)BC486; (2003)182CTR(Ker)424; 261ITR292(Ker); 2003(1)KLT765
..... taken the same view. the tribunal, however, referred to the provisions of section 11(1) of the companies act and held that since the partnership firm was registered under the indian partnership act and also obtained licence under the money lenders act the requirements of section 11(1) are satisfied and, therefore, the assessee firm is entitled to registration.5 ..... it has to be registered under the companies act, or under the money lenders act, partnership act or under any other indian law such as travancore cochin literary, scientific and charitable societies registration act or under the societies registration act. so far as partnership is concerned it is governed by the provisions of the indian partnership act. what is contemplated under section 11 of ..... the companies act is that in respect of a partnership with more than ten persons for carrying on banking business it must be formed under the indian partnership act and consequently the partnership so formed must be registered under the partnership act. sub-sections (4) and (5) ..... fact the tribunal has rightly understood this position and held that since the assessee firm is registered under the indian partnership act besides holding licence under the money lenders act the provisions of section 11 of the companies act is satisfied. in other words the inhibition contained under section 11 is not attracted. we are perfectly in agreement .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Gujarat
Reported in : AIR1969Guj205
..... he had been expelled from the suit firm. he has been wrongfully expelled. it is a mala fide act of the appellants and it is in contravention of the statutory provisions of the indian partnership act. after the suit notice ex. 28, the respondent was not allowed to take part in the affairs ..... prosecuting the suit. the suit was a suit to recover the debt due, to the firm. it was, therefore, observed:'under section 47, partnership act after the dissolution of a firm, the remaining partners may represent the dissolved firm including the interest of the deceased partner to recover any debt due ..... district judge cannot therefore, be disturbed so far as they are concerned. in the circumstances, it would not be possible to take accounts of the partnership even if the appellant succeeded in this appeal. this appeal, therefore, cannot legitimately be proceeded with in the absence of the legal representatives of ..... wrong. it was not bona fide. notice of expulsion was ultra vires, illegal and unenforceable. clause 25 of the partnership agreement is consistent with section 33(1) of the act provided it is exercised in good faith by majority of partners. that the respondent was not expelled by the appellants in ..... have expelled the plaintiff-respondent in the bona fide exercise of the power of expulsion vested in them in view of the provisions of the partnership agreement referred to, in the plaint that the suit was misconceived and not maintainable. the suit should be dismissed.5. the learned trial judge .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Gujarat
Reported in : 100ITR297(Guj)
..... in favour of his legal representatives. 11. we find that these contentions of the learned advocate of the accountable persons suffer from a serious misapprehension as regards the incidence of partnership agreement. 12. sections 14 and 15 of the indian partnership act preclude any partners from claiming any property or any specific share in any property of the firm so long as the ..... partnership subsists and the accounts thereof are not taken. this is because of the community of interest which all the partners have in the properties of the firm. but this does ..... further contended that, on account of the dissolution of the firm resulting from the death of a partner, new rights come into existence as provided by section 46 of the partnership act in favour of his legal representative. according to shri pathak, therefore, extinguishment of the deceased partners and emergence of new rights in favour of his legal representatives show that there ..... , the interest of the deceased extended even to it. as held by the supreme court in k. k. shah v. khorshed banu, section 55 of the partnership act does not provide that goodwill of a partnership firm can be taken into account only when there is a general dissolution of the firm, and not when the representatives of a deceased partners claim his .....Tag this Judgment!