Court : Kolkata
Reported in : 164Ind.Cas.428
..... a hindu joint family business.3. this seems quite clear, on referring to the definition under section 4 of the indian partnership act and the recent judgment of this court in lalchand v. m. g. bold and co. : air1934cal810 . the relevant section of the presidency towns ..... namely, that the order dated september 15, 1933, for examination of the petitioner and sohanlal mohata under section 36 of the presidency towns insolvency act should be vacated and set aside on the ground that the application on which that order was passed, was made by bhimraj pursuram which admittedly ..... instituted by a joint hindu family and that no such proceedings can be brought by such a family under the provisions of the presidency towns insolvency act.2. learned counsel, however, has informed me that he does not now press for setting aside the earlier order but that he presses the ..... petitioner points out that there is no provision under this act which would entitle a joint family business to initiate proceedings ..... insolvency act is section 99, which states that any two or more persons being partners, or any person carrying on a business in partnership name, may take proceedings or be proceeded against under this act in the name of the firm but learned counsel for the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : 163Ind.Cas.703
..... suit on that, ground.2. a further objection was raised that the suit could not be maintained owing to the provisions of section 69 of the indian partnership act of 1932. section 69(2) provides that no suit to enforce a right arising from a contract shall be instituted in any court by or on ..... is barred under section 69(2) of the act.3. the learned advocate for the opposite party says that that decision is not correct and that it has not taken ..... section 74(a) of the partnership act. this matter was dealt with recently by this court in a case reported in surendra nath de v. manohar de : air1934cal754 , and it was held that a suit by an unregistered firm to enforce a contractual claim accruing before the commencement of the indian partnership act but brought after its commencement ..... the learned judges in the case to which i have referred have pointed out the provisions of sub section (3) of section 1 of the partnership act show that the intention of the legislature was to ensure that a suit which was started after october 1, 1932, should only be by a registered firm ..... after its passage. the learned judge was. in my opinion, wrong in his view of the interpretation of the provisions of the partnership act and the suit ought to have been dismissed.4. the rule is made absolute with costs hearing fee two gold mohurs. .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : 5ITR182(Cal)
..... the per sons who are said to be parties nos. 17,18,19 and 20 cannot, properly speaking, be partners by reason of the provisions of section 30 of the indian partnership act. but again, says mr. gupta, although, strictly speaking, these persons could not be partners in this concern nevertheless the provision of section 30 entail that they should be treated as ..... capital of the wakf vests in the almighty. such being the case, i do not appreciate how a wakf cant be partner in a firm, for section 4 of the indian partnership act defines 'partnership' as the relation between person who have agreed to share the profits of a business carried on by all or any of them ..... the instrument or copy, as the case may be, the following certificate, namely, this instrument of partnership (or this certified copy of an instrument of partnership) has this day been registered with me, the income-tax officer, under clause (14) of section 2 of the indian income-tax act, 1922. this certificate of registration has 'effect from the - day of april up to 31st ..... march, 19'. it seems to me that the income-tax officer is only empowered to register a partnership or rather the partnership which has been put forward or nothing else.mr. gupta says that .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1950Cal391
..... the petitioner seeks to set aside the award is that the respondent is not a registered firm and in any event was not registered under the indian partnership act at the material time. the letter dated 6th may 1949 from the registrar of firms addressed to the petitioner's attorney shows that gauttam & co ..... . was not registered in the office of the registrar under the partnership act.7. learned counsel for the petitioner, mr. k. k. basu, has contended that the effect of non-registration is fatal to the validity of the ..... contends that the reference to arbitration to the bengal chamber of commerce-constitutes a 'proceeding to enforce a right arising from a contract' under section 69(3), partnership act. according to him the effect of sub-sections (1), (2) and (3) of section 69 properly read is that no suit or proceeding to ..... a right arising from a contract shall be instituted in any court or before any arbitrator by a firm unless that firm is registered under the partnership act.9. no authority has been cited by mr. basu in support of his contention. in the affidavit in opposition filed by the respondent it is ..... pointed out that gauttam & co. is a registered firm and it was registered under the partnership act on 1st june 1949 and this appears from a copy of the certificate of the registrar annexed to the affidavit of a partner of the said firm .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1952Cal499
..... not, however, 'ipso facto' become partners in the business; the members of the joint family are not clothed with the rights and obligations of a partner, as defined by the indian partnership act. the authorities are now clear that'in such a case, the family as a unit does not become a partner, but only such of its members as in fact entered ..... into a contractual relationship with the stranger; the partnership will be governed by the indian partnership act. (vide mayne's hindu law and usages, eleventh edition, section 308 quoted with approval by the judicial committee in 'ramkrishna v. ratan chand', 58 i a 173 ..... notice in writing is served on all the other partners, a suit brought by a partner for dissolution of the partnership, even on any of the grounds mentioned in section 44 of the indian partnership act would not be competent.8. chapter vi of the indian partnership act deals with the dissolution of a firm. dissolution may be in one of different ways. section 40 refers to ..... , even if proved, was not sufficient in law.6. reliance is placed in this connection on the provisions contained in section 43 of the indian partnership act, 1932, which is in the following terms:'43. (1) where the partnership is at will, the firm may be dissolved by any partner giving notice in writing to all the other partners of his intention to dissolve .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1951Cal69,55CWN541
..... criminal breach of trust by one patnr. as against the other in respect of partnership property.53. what is often forgotten in this context is that the indian partnership act is not a complete code on the law of partnership. it is a statute to define & amend the law relating to partnership. the act does not profess to consolidate the entire law on the subject. until dissolution ..... of partnership & accounts no specific item of property belongs to any particular patnr. as against the ..... . in the judgment of the learned chief justice, the nature of a patnr's property in the partnership assets has been discussed. that is the english law. that is also the indian law. the substance of the english law has been enacted in section 46, partnership act. section 46 is as follows :'on the dissolution of a firm every patnr. or his representative is ..... & accounts & until after losses & assets of the firm have been attended to in the manner laid down in the section. the same idea operates also in section 52, partnership act, where a contract creating partnership is rescinded on the ground of fraud or misrepresentation of any of the parties thereto. there again the party entitled to rescind has the right to a lien .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : 20ITR51(Cal)
..... petition that out of the above-named five firm four have been duly constituted under four registered deeds of partnership and the said firms have been registered under the indian partnership act. it appears that the respondent has also made five several assessment orders on the 29th of march, 1950, ..... ladhuram taparia on the 28th of february, 1941, and entered into a written agreement of partnership on the 16th of october, 1941. the firm of the petitioners was duly registered under the indian partnership act on the 19th july, 1943. the petitioner ladhuram had 8 as share and the petitioners ..... ganpat rai and bhairodan had 4 as share each in the said firm. the firm was first assessed to income-tax in respect of the year of assessment 1942-43 and for that purpose it was registered under section 26a of the indian income-tax act ..... officer issuing the notice of demand. it is submitted that the discretion conferred upon the income-tax officer under section 45 of the indian act should be exercised in a reasonable and judicious manner and not arbitrarily. it is further submitted that the power or the discretion conferred ..... of mandamus, prohibition and certiorari for an order cancelling the notice of demand issued by the respondent under section 29 of the indian income-tax act and calling upon him to forbear from taking further steps in respect of the said notice of demand and for quashing of .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1954Cal159,57CWN790
..... 226 of the constitution.2. the facts which are material for the purpose of this appeal may be briefly stated as follows: the respondent is a firm registered under the indian partnership act and carries on the business of manufacture of an adhesive substance known as p. b. clay which is intended for use in building works. the respondent has been carrying on ..... maintainable. in order to test the validity of this contention we have to examine the provisions of the relevant statutes.6 section 3 of the west bengal cement control act (west bengal act xxvi of 1948) authorises the state government by order in the official gazette to provide for regulating or prohibiting the production, supply & distribution of cement & trade and commerce therein ..... quantity of cement not exceeding 10 per cent is required for its manufacture.under the west bengal cement control ordinance which was replaced by the west bengal cement control act, (west bengal act xxvi of 1948), cement became a controlled commodity from 1948 and it became impossible for the respondent to acquire or buy or deal in cement except under a permit ..... it was equally incumbent upon the appellants before us to forbear from withholding any licence or permit or order. the respondent further alleged in the petition that the authorities concerned acted mala fide, arbitrarily and unlawfully in withholding the permit and were influenced by the fact that the political predilections of the partners of the respondent were disagreeable to them.4 .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1958Cal703
..... of a joint hindu family do not arise; such of its members as in fact enter into contractual relations with the stranger alone become partners, and the partnership would be governed by the indian partnership act. their lordships pointed out that authority for this proposition was to be found in mayne's hindu law and in the board's earlier decision in the case ..... adduced to show that any of the other members of the joint families agreed to join the partnership or did any acts in connection with the partnership.19. on behalf of the appellants mr. mitter argued that a partnership under the hindu law, not governed by the indian partnership act came into existence between the two joint families as a result of the action of the kartas ..... such of its members as in fact enter into a contractual relation with the stranger : the partnership will be governed by the act.'16. as was pointed out by their lordships, the sections referred to partnership in the indian contract act have been repealed and are now embodied in the indian partnership act, 1932.17. in this view of the law their lordships decided in that case that ..... gherulal parakh.25. i do not see how it can be doubted for a moment that these partnerships are governed by the indian partnership act.26. i am therefore unable to accept as correct the reasoning on which the court below held that section 69 of the partnership act is no bar to the suit. this will be a bar unless the case falls within the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1954Cal409
..... a partner to withdraw a suit or proceeding filed on behalf of the firm.learned counsel for samaddar has relied on these sections of the indian partnership act to support his argument that the other partners of the plaintiff firm should not be allowed to withdraw, stay or relinquish or compromise the claim ..... from the english law on the point and reliance has been placed on the footnote in sir dinshaw mulla's commentary on the indian partnership act of 1934 criticising lindley's observation, to which i will presently make a reference. but before i do so a common sense ..... defendant questioned the maintainability of the suit.11. the provisions of the law of partnership with special reference to indian partnership act may be examined in order to determine the question raised on this application. section 19(2)(c),partnership act provides that in the absence ofany usage or custom of trade to the contrary ..... to sue on behalf of the firm then the action should not be allowed to proceed. subject to contract between the parties, section 12, partnership act provides in sub-clause (c) that any difference arising as to the ordinary matters connected with the business may be decided by the majority of ..... question here is not concerned with partners' relations with third parties but with the relations of partners 'inter se'. i find nothing in the partnership act which can be construed and regarded as a statutory prohibition of the course of action now asked by the majority of the partners in this case .....Tag this Judgment!