Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act Sorted by: old Court: mumbai Year: 1933 Page 1 of about 9 results (0.024 seconds)

Jan 30 1933 (PC)

R.S. Rochi Ram Vs. Faizullah Khan

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jan-30-1933

Reported in : (1933)35BOMLR745

..... no consideration for such a settlement because it is said that article 106 of the indian limitation act provides a period of limitation for suits for an account and share of profits of a dissolved partnership, the period of limitation being three years, and that the time from which the period begins to run is the date ..... of the dissolution, and inasmuch as this settlement was arrived at more than three years from what is said to be a dissolution of the partnership, namely, the determination of the joint adventure, it is said that the partners had only agreed to settle something which they were not bound to account for. in fact this ..... , which is the view in fact taken by the two courts, and, therefore, it must be taken that there was at the end of 1924 a final settlement of the partnership accounts under which the respective plaintiffs would have become entitled to the sums for which they respectively sued.2. the only other point that was raised was that there was ..... the plaintiffs were faizullah khan in the first suit and mauladad khan, since deceased, in the second suit, who were suing to recover their shares on a settlement of certain partnership transactions between them and the respective defendants. it appears that the plaintiffs had been partners in a contract for supply and transport, which had been obtained from the commissariat department .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 27 1933 (PC)

In Re: Vallibhai Adamji

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jan-27-1933

Reported in : AIR1933Bom407; (1933)35BOMLR881; 145Ind.Cas.619

..... partners when he recovers judgment, even though that judgment remains unsatisfied. the cause of action being single cannot afterwards be divided into two or more: see lindley on partnership, 9th edn., p. 328. this principle was laid down by parke b. in king v. hoare (1844) 13 m. & w. 494 in which case ..... that they only subsequently learnt that the applicant was a partner with his son, and they further say that they have sufficient evidence to establish the partnership. the applicant's answer is that even assuming that he was a partner, which he denies, the debt due by the firm was merged in the ..... to set aside the adjudication order made on november 7, 1932, adjudicating him and his son salebhai vallibhai, both described as 'lately carrying on business in partnership at taher building, koliwada, mandvi, bombay, in the name and style of salebhai vallibhai and at saddar bazaar, bilaspur, in the name and style of adamji ..... decision of macleod j. in shivlal motilal v. birdiohand jivraj is disputed by messrs. pollock and mulla in their commentaries on section 43 of the indian contract act. but even assuming that that decision is binding upon me, and that a subsequent suit is not competent to the promisee after recovering judgment against one ..... respect thereof may be barred by the law of limitation. if, therefore, it is proved that the debt in dispute is a partnership debt, its existence will suffice to support an adjudication order against both the father and the son.6. as the factum of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 21 1933 (PC)

Mathuradas Maganlal Vs. Maganlal Parbhudas

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Sep-21-1933

Reported in : AIR1934Bom79; (1934)36BOMLR47; 150Ind.Cas.478

..... apply, so that that is in substance a repeal of the existing statutory provisions as to arbitration by agreement in cases to which the indian arbitration act applies, thus leaving the indian arbitration act as the only statutory provision as to agreements coming within its terms. then there is a proviso to section 3 to the effect that ..... other relatives of theirs were partners in a firm carried on in the name of the defendant, that is to say, as maganlal parbhudas, and that partnership was dissolved in 1929, when disputes arose between the parties which were referred by a written agreement to the arbitration of two gentlemen. it is further alleged ..... is a legal submission to arbitration.14. i respectfully agree with those observations, and inasmuch as i think that both the code of civil procedure and the indian arbitration act are not compulsory, but deal with methods of procedure for going to arbitration and enforcing awards, it is still, in my opinion, open, to those ..... it recites the written agreement to refer the questions in dispute between the partners in the firm of maganlal parbhudas in respect of that partnership, and when one looks at clause 9 of the award it deals with a question not between those partners, or relating to that ..... partnership, but a question between the plaintiff and defendant in relation to an outside matter, and if one took the award by itself it .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 13 1933 (PC)

Suleman Haji Ahmed Umar Vs. P.N. Patell

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jan-13-1933

Reported in : AIR1933Bom381; (1933)35BOMLR722; 145Ind.Cas.557

..... stated, is made up of a transfer on certain terms, and the acceptance of these terms. acceptance is defined by section 2(b) of the indian contract act as the act of the person to whom a proposal is made which signifies his assent thereto. the lease has been signed by the defendant, and he has, ..... of five years at the rate of rs. 325 per month commencing from march 1, 1924. plaintiff and his father carried on business in bombay in partnership in the name of haji ahmed umar and son up to june 1924, when the plaintiff's father died, leaving the plaintiff who was his only ..... it was not registered as far as he was concerned. is the lease then admissible, and if so for what purpose section 49 of the indian registration act lays down that no document required to be registered shall affect any immoveable property comprised therein or be received as evidence of any transaction affecting such ..... that the plaintiff cannot rely on any oral agreement when the terms of the agreement are reduced to writing by virtue of section 91 of the indian evidence act. but all the terms of the agreement were admittedly not reduced to writing in the letter of february 6. as to the lease the defendant ..... in this case, for, the lessee only binds himself by covenants which are personal. there is nothing in the indian registration act which makes the lease registrable by both the parties, though the act provides the machinery to be adopted in cases where a party executing the lease denies its execution. all the relevant .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 07 1933 (PC)

Amulakchand Mewaram Vs. Babulal Kanalal Taliwala

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Mar-07-1933

Reported in : AIR1933Bom304; (1933)35BOMLR569; 147Ind.Cas.786

..... amulakchand mewaram, a firm of merchants carrying on business at kalbadevi road outside the fort of bombay. it was very early appreciated that in fact that firm is not a partnership firm, but is the name of a joint hindu family, in which, according to the evidence, there are three members, and it was proposed in 1926 that the plaint should ..... the decision of mr. justice crump and the court of appeal in ramprasad v. shrinivas : air1925bom527 , though the actual decision in that case turned on the effect of the indian limitation act having regard to an amendment which had been allowed. the learned advocate general on behalf of the respondent has relied on a decision of mr. justice blackwell in vyankatesh oil .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 21 1933 (PC)

Madhgouda Babaji Patil Vs. Halappa Balappa Patil

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Aug-21-1933

Reported in : AIR1934Bom178; (1934)36BOMLR327

..... alleged partners of the plaintiff were not parties to the suit, the suit should be dismissed for non-joinder. beaman j. held that though the alleged partnership was proved, yet the suit could not be dismissed for non-joinder. beaman j. observed at p. 22 of the report as follows :certainly it ..... ground of non-joinder of a's brothers, it was considered too late to add them as co-plaintiffs by reason of section 22 of the indian limitation act. the brothers at the hearing expressed their willingness that ' a ' should sue alone. it was held that such assent did not obviate the necessity ..... suit proceeded with. as observed by jacob j. in guruvayya's case, such an amendment would not attract the operation of section 22 of the indian limitation act. 15. having regard to what has been stated above, i reverse the decree of the lower court, allow the appeal, and send the case ..... subsisting as between them and others claiming generally in the same interest, the determination (by application of the provisions of section 22 of the limitation act) of the date of institution of the suit as regards such freshly joined parties does not ordinarily affect the right of the original plaintiff to continue ..... concerns provided he was either previously authorised to represent it, or, in the absence of such authority, the other coparcener subsequently by words or conduct ratified his acts. in ramkrishna v. vinayak narayan i.l.r. (1910) bom. 354 : 12 bom. l.r. 219the facts were as follows: a hindu family living .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 28 1933 (PC)

Popat Virji Vs. Damodar Jairam

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Aug-28-1933

Reported in : (1934)36BOMLR844

..... lalji. in that written statement she stated that she had carried on the business in the name of damodar jairam till lately, but mulji had no authority to trade in partnership or pass the promissory note. when that suit was filed, chhabildas, the natural father of the second defendant (haridas), was appointed a guardian ad litem of the second defendant, and ..... that this rule cannot apply under all circumstances. this is only an illustration of a case showing the circumstances under which the same person may be a proper person to act as such guardian.20. having regard to these authorities, i shall examine the facts as they existed when mulji was appointed guardian in the zanzibar suit. [after discussing the facts ..... {corresponding to order xxxii, rule 3) was imperative upon this point; the court, after satisfying itself on the fact of the minority, was bound to appoint a proper person to act on behalf of the minors in the conduct of the case. these observations were approved by the privy council. their lordships emphasized that the courts should strictly follow the rules ..... , but to satisfy itself that the proposed guardian was a fit and proper person to represent the minor in the suit, to put in a proper defence, and generally to act in the interest of the minor : ram chandra das v. joti prasad i.l.r (1907) all. 675 in this connection strong reliance is put on behalf of the plaintiff .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 16 1933 (PC)

Mauladad Khan Vs. Faizullah Khan

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Nov-16-1933

Reported in : (1934)36BOMLR227

..... preliminary decree was passed on october 22, 1923, declaring the shares of the parties in the partnership and ordering accounts to be taken. there was no appeal against this decree.2. on march 24, 1924, the subordinate judge passed a final decree under which a sum of ..... to this effect and dated march 1, 1929.4. in the meantime, however, the case had gone on in india as if no such appeal were pending. the district judge acted on the remand order of the judicial commissioner, accounts were taken by commissioners, their report was considered by the district judge, and on january 14, 1927, he delivered a judgment ..... macmillan, j.1. this is an unusual and a most unfortunate case. it began ten years ago with a suit filed for partnership accounts. the suit was instituted in the court of the district judge of dera ismail khan, but was transferred by him to that of the subordinate judge, by whom a .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 07 1933 (PC)

Sir Rajendra Nath Mukerjee Vs. the Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Dec-07-1933

Reported in : (1934)36BOMLR267

..... after the judgment of the high court on martin & co.'s appeal final and conclusive assessments were made on martin & co. and the individuals composing that partnership without including the income of those individuals as partners of burn & co. their income as partners of burn & co. then, it is suggested, 'escaped ..... held in martin & co. in the year 1927-28 martin & co. was a registered firm while3. burn & co. was unregistered. under the indian income-tax act registered and unregistered firms are differently taxed in various important respects.4. on april 7, 1927, the income-tax officer of district i issued a notice ..... conclusive assessments have now been made on messrs. martin & co. and on their individual partners?3. upon a true construction of the indian income-tax act must not any assessment be completed within the year of assessment or in the event of such assessment not being so completed, is not ..... firm carrying on business in calcutta, assessing them to income-tax and super-tax for the year 1927-28, under section 23 (1) of the indian income-tax act, 1922. the main question in the present appeal, in which the individual partners of burn & co. are the appellants, is whether it was competent ..... however, submit that this is a case of income escaping assessment within the meaning of section 34. assessment, they argue, is a definite act, indeed the most critical act in the process of taxation. if an assessment is not made on income within the tax year then that income, they submit, has .....

Tag this Judgment!


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