Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act Sorted by: old Court: andhra pradesh Year: 2013 Page 1 of about 13 results (0.067 seconds)

Jun 06 2013 (HC)

Yousuf Andcompany, Rep. by Its Partner Vs. the Government Ofandhra Pra ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jun-06-2013

..... a fresh lease on such terms and conditions as may be prescribed. explanation to section 4 stated that for the purposes of act 15 of 1992, notwithstanding anything in the indian partnership act, 1932, the act of a lessee in entering into a partnership agreement or other cognate agreement for carrying on any activity whatsoever on the demised plot shall be deemed to be a violation ..... in w.a.741/1993). thus, in view of the said explanation to section 3 (which provides that where a lessee enters into a partnership agreement in respect of the demised plot, then notwithstanding anything in the indian partnership act, 1932, it shall also be deemed to be in violation of the conditions of the lease), the judgment of the civil court in o ..... common judgment dt.18.08.1994 in w.p.12180/1994 relying on explanation to section 4 in act 15 of 1992 (which stated that where a lessee enters into a partnership agreement in respect of the demised plot, then notwithstanding anything in the indian partnership act, 1932, they shall also be deemed to be in violation of the conditions of the lease).74. the ..... of 1992 (as amended) which treated such assignment as a violation of the conditions of the lease notwithstanding anything contained in the indian partnership act, 1932 (vide goa glass fibre limited v. state of goa and another8) and therefore the respondents are entitled to take into account the conduct of petitioner by 1984 as a .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 06 2013 (HC)

K.Kotaoah and Others Vs. Koganti Siva Pras

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jun-06-2013

..... is not a case where any amount is payable under a contract or other legal obligations to contract the provisions under section 69 of the indian partnership act (for short, 'the act'). the evidence of the 2nd defendant clearly goes to show that he has consciously executed all the documents and the income tax return also ..... the other defendants?. 2) whether the suit is bad for want of registration of the 1st defendant firm and not maintainable under section 69 of the indian partnership act?.9. points: though the 2nd defendant has raised several contentions in the written statement, in his evidence he admits the execution of the agreement. ex ..... and there is no material as to what is the difference of a registration of a firm for the purpose of income tax or under the partnership act. in fact, the contention raised by the learned counsel for the appellants also even if to be accepted that the 1st defendant firm is not ..... is not a registered one though the plaintiff failed to produce the particulars of the registration or the particulars of the persons in whose name the partnership was recorded.11. so far as the consideration is concerned, ex.a.12 though a deed of dissolution clearly shows that there was an undertaking ..... on 12.01.1979, accounts between partners were looked into and an amount of rs.76,553/- became due to the plaintiff from the dissolved partnership by the date or dissolution. an amount of rs.26,553/- was adjusted to the plaintiff on that day either by payment in cash or by .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 03 2013 (HC)

M/S.Rollon Steels, Khairtabad, Hyuderaba Vs. A.P.Transco Ltd.,(Formerl ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jul-03-2013

..... who was no longer a partner of the firm, was shown as its representative. he submits that as per section 32 of the indian partnership act, 1932 (for short, 'the act').the obligation on the part of the erstwhile partners.ceases, on their retirement and that the respondent ought to have impleaded the existing ..... may retire,- (a) with the consent of all the other partners.(b) in accordance with an express agreement by the partners.or (c) where the partnership is at will, by giving notice in writing to all the other partners of his intention to retire. (2) a retiring partner may be discharged from ..... whether dw.1 established that he ceased to be the managing partner of the appellant's firm?. ii) assuming that dw.1 retired from the partnership, whether he can be held liable for the suit claim?. point no.(i):- the suit was filed for recovery of amount, which represented the cost ..... evidence on record, the trial court framed the following issues for consideration: 1) ".whether the managing partner of the defendant's firm retired from the partnership even before the filing of the suit?. 2) whether the defendant's managing partner is not a necessary party to the suit?. 3) whether k ..... was issued by the respondent inviting tenders for entrustment of work of conversion of steel billets into steel bars.the tender submitted by the appellant, a partnership firm, was accepted on 10.08.1982 and the contract was awarded. under the contract, the respondent would supply the billets and the appellant, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 10 2013 (HC)

Smt. Bommidipati Madha Vs. the State of Andhra Pradesh Rep.by Publi

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Oct-10-2013

..... of firm would also discloses that the registrar of firms, andhra pradesh, acknowledges the receipt of the statement prescribed under section 58(1) of indian partnership act.13. at this stage, the learned counsel for the respondent objected for looking into the said document by contending that the plea taken by the ..... of registration of firms issued by the registrar of firms, dated 19.11.2007 establish that sri sai santhosh constructions was represented as a partnership firm in the year 2007 itself. therefore, there is no irregularity or illegality in petitioner issuing the cheque as an authorized signatory of the ..... by him, wherein the petitioner was portrayed as a sole proprietress of sai santosh constructions, it cannot, now, be contended that it is a partnership firm. since the issues involved herein are disputed questions of fact, he submits that the same have to be established during the course of trial ..... determination is whether the petitioner is a proprietress of a firm or a managing partner of a partnership firm?.10. before proceeding further, it would be relevant to extract section 138(c) of the act which reads as under:- provided that nothing contained in this section shall apply unless:- (c) ..... taken in sheoratan agarwal v. state of m.p.6, and clarifying judgment in anil hada v. indian acylic ltd7, held that for maintaining a prosecution under section 141 of the act, arraying of a company as an accused is imperative and other categories of offenders can only be brought .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 31 2013 (HC)

1.Kommagani Ilaiah and Anoth Vs. 1.Kommagani Bikshapathi and Oth

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Dec-31-2013

..... sait tarajee khimchand (3 supra) relied upon by the learned counsel for appellants, the documents sought to be relied upon was a day book and a ledger maintained in a partnership firm and since these were private documents, the court held that unless they are proved by examining the author of the entries therein, they could not have been accepted in ..... . yelamarti satyam @ satteyya and ors.3 in this regard. he also contended that there is no evidence led by plaintiff as contemplated under section 50 of the indian evidence act, 1872 (for short ".the act".) for coming to a conclusion about the relationship of rajamallu with plaintiff and his alleged mother pedda narasamma. he contended that the lower appellate court failed to consider ..... the subject, is a relevant fact : provided that such opinion shall not be sufficient to prove a marriage in proceedings under the indian divorce act, 1869 (4 of 1869) or in prosecutions under sections 494, 495, 497 or 498 of the indian penal code (45 of 1860).".19. admittedly, the plaintiff was living away from the family of rajamallu and only defendant nos ..... finding in the judgment passed by the lower appellate court.18. the reliance by the learned counsel for the appellants on section 50 of the evidence act,1872 is also misplaced. section 50 of the act states : ".50. opinion or relationship, when relevant :-- when the court has to form an opinion as to the relationship of one person to another, the opinion .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 04 2013 (HC)

1.Sarosh Sam Bastawala and Another Vs. State of A.P., Represented by A ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Apr-04-2013

..... offences. but the criminal cases having overwhelmingly and pre-dominatingly civil flavour stand on different footing for the purposes of quashing, particularly the offences arising from commercial, financial, mercantile, civil, partnership or such like transactions or the offences arising out of matrimony relating to dowry, etc. or the family disputes where the wrong is basically private or personal in nature and ..... accused repaid by way of cheques, which when presented got bounced, would show that there was dishonest intention right from inception, thereby, prima facie, constituting an offence under section 420 ipc.9. the trial court as well the revisional court have rightly held that the allegations made in the charge sheet would prima facie constitute an offence of cheating. the said ..... proceedings in cc no.650/2002 on the file of vi additional metropolitan magistrate, city criminal courts, hyderabad, which was taken on file for an offence punishable under section 420 ipc. originally, only the state represented by public prosecutor was made respondent. subsequently, respondents 2 to 7 were impleaded as respondents pursuant to an order dt. 20-3- 2009 passed in ..... various offences under sections 120-b read with sections 420, 467, 468, 471 of the ipc read with sections 5(2) and 5(1)(d) of the prevention of corruption act, 1947 and section 13(2) read with section 13(1)(d) of the prevention of corruption act, 1988. the suit filed for recovery of the amount ended in a compromise as the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 18 2013 (HC)

M/S. Centralroadlines Corporatio Vs. M/S.Steel Authority of Indialtd. ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jun-18-2013

..... ?. (8) whether the plaintiff is entitled to the interest prayed for ?. (9) to what relief ?. additional issue: whether the plaintiff is registered partnership firm and whether the person who is representing the plaintiff in the suit is a partner of the same?. the evidence was recorded with reference to o ..... 8) whether the plaintiff is entitled to the lien prayed for ?. (9) to what relief ?. additional issue: (1) whether the plaintiff is a registered partnership firm and whether the person who is representing the plaintiff in the suit is partner of the same ?. o.s.no.54 of 1995: (1) whether defendants ..... this suit is barred by order 2 rule 2 c.p.c.?. (10) to what relief ?. additional issues: (1) whether the plaintiff is a registered partnership firm and whether the person who is representing the plaintiff in the suit is partner of the same ?. o.s.no.36 of 1995: (1) whether ..... of 1995 filed by the appellant, for recovery of damages, by invoking section 9 of the act, is not maintainable, since there was no compliance of section 10 of the act. she placed reliance upon m/s.indian drugs and pharmaceuticals ltd., hyderabad, versus m/s.savani transport p. ltd., hyderabad3. it ..... company. naturally, this process involved a considerable expenditure. there was no specific order, as such, passed by the appellant terminating the contract, alleging the acts of negligence on the part of the 1st respondent. even the 1st respondent did not object for transporting the goods through other mode. as a matter .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 18 2013 (HC)

M/S.Centralroadlines Corporatio Vs. M/S.Steel Authority of Indialtd. a ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jun-18-2013

..... ?. (8) whether the plaintiff is entitled to the interest prayed for ?. (9) to what relief ?. additional issue: whether the plaintiff is registered partnership firm and whether the person who is representing the plaintiff in the suit is a partner of the same?. the evidence was recorded with reference to o ..... 8) whether the plaintiff is entitled to the lien prayed for ?. (9) to what relief ?. additional issue: (1) whether the plaintiff is a registered partnership firm and whether the person who is representing the plaintiff in the suit is partner of the same ?. o.s.no.54 of 1995: (1) whether defendants ..... this suit is barred by order 2 rule 2 c.p.c.?. (10) to what relief ?. additional issues: (1) whether the plaintiff is a registered partnership firm and whether the person who is representing the plaintiff in the suit is partner of the same ?. o.s.no.36 of 1995: (1) whether ..... of 1995 filed by the appellant, for recovery of damages, by invoking section 9 of the act, is not maintainable, since there was no compliance of section 10 of the act. she placed reliance upon m/s.indian drugs and pharmaceuticals ltd., hyderabad, versus m/s.savani transport p. ltd., hyderabad3. it ..... company. naturally, this process involved a considerable expenditure. there was no specific order, as such, passed by the appellant terminating the contract, alleging the acts of negligence on the part of the 1st respondent. even the 1st respondent did not object for transporting the goods through other mode. as a matter .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 02 2013 (HC)

Sri Venkata Ramana Arcade, Nellore,being Vs. Y.Vijaya Lakshmamma (Died ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Sep-02-2013

..... taxes, electricity charges and municipal tap charges for the entire building, including the e.p.schedule property. the petitioner firm had entered into a partnership agreement in respect of the business with r.vijaya varma and his associate, alluri atchuta rama raju, on 22.07.2004 itself and was running ..... and that the petitioner firm was in possession and enjoyment of the said property on behalf of and through r.vijaya varma owing to the partnership agreement which existed between them. the third respondent herein filed a counter to this e.a.contending that the same was not permissible in law ..... property to r.vijaya varma and his associate, alluri atchuta rama raju, on 22.07.2004. the petitioner firm claimed that it was in partnership with the said r.vijaya varma and his associate, alluri atchuta rama raju, and was carrying on business in home appliances under the name and ..... 5 scc117the hon'ble sr.justice sanjay kumar civil revision petition nos.4257 of2012and1646of2013c o m m o n order sr.venkata ramana arcade, nellore, a partnership firm, is the petitioner in these two civil revision petitions. the genesis of this lis can be traced to o.s.no.138 of 1994 instituted ..... purpose of allowing the amendment, per the court, should be to minimize litigation. in revajeetu builders v/s. narayanaswamy6 on an analysis of english and indian case law, the supreme court carved out the following principles which should weigh with the court while dealing with an application for amendment: (1) whether .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 10 2013 (HC)

M/S.Suryodaya Infra Projects (i) Pvt. Lt Vs. the National Mineral Deve ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Oct-10-2013

..... be held responsible if some unscrupulous person had impersonated the dissolved firm and had submitted a tampered certificate, actually issued in the name of their erstwhile partnership firm-prime constructions; the respondents had acted illegally in passing the impugned order without satisfying themselves whether or not the allegations, in the show cause notice, were correct; and rejection of a ..... to sail, bhilai; basing on that information they had stated, in the reply notice, that prime constructions, bhilai had submitted their tender to bhilai steel plant; the erstwhile partnership firm i.e.prime constructions, hyderabad was a sub-contractor of ratna infrastructure projects pvt.ltd and, as a sub- contractor, had successfully completed some works with nmdc; ratna ..... thus the 2nd respondent, vide letter dated 17.04.2013, informed the petitioner that, during scrutiny of their techno- commercial bids, it was observed that prime constructions (a partnership firm which had merged with the petitioner) had tampered with the certificate, issued in their name by the bachili complex of the 1st respondent, while enclosing it with their ..... state in relation to its commercial activities. while contractual matters are not beyond the realm of judicial review, its application is limited (noble resources ltd.v.state of orissa30; indian oil corpn. ltd.v.amritsar gas service31; and lic of india v. escorts ltd.32) primarily to the infirmity in the decision making process, and whether it is reasonable .....

Tag this Judgment!


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