Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act Sorted by: old Court: orissa Page 10 of about 143 results (0.036 seconds)

Apr 05 1988 (HC)

Gadadhar Dixit Vs. Utkal Flour Mills (Pvt.) Ltd.

Court : Orissa

Reported in : [1989]66CompCas188(Orissa)

..... issue no. 2 that the company in question is in substance a partnership concern and, therefore, the principles applicable to dissolution of a partnership as provided under section 44(5) of the indian partnership act are applicable for winding up of the company. admittedly, though there was previously partnership firm, the same was dissolved and a company came into existence. ..... but the mere fact that a pre-existing partnership firm has been converted into a private ..... limited company does not by itself mean that the company retains its character of a partnership. ..... the basis of which the aforesaid prayer has been made are as follows:(a) that the above named company was originally a partnership firm prior to its conversion and incorporation as a company under the indian companies act, 1956. the partnership consisted of seven partners, namely, 1. ramakrishna sharma, 2. smt. durgadevi sharma, 3. srikrishna sharma, 4. sachikanta routray .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 01 1989 (HC)

Bhabagrahi Panigrahi and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Orissa

Reported in : AIR1990Ori42

..... the petitioner no. 1 bhabagrahi panigrahi is the managing director of m/s. premier industrial salts and chemicals (pvt.) limited (petitioner no. 2), a company incorporated under the indian companies act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the company') carrying on business in the manufacture and sale of sodium dichromate by establishing a plant at jagatpur in cuttack district. the petitioners ..... sell in exercise of its power under section 29 of the state financial-corporation act, 1951-(hereinafter referred to as 'the act') in pursuance of the notice under annexure-1 and handing over the possession of the same to the opposite party no. 3 ms. kalinga chemicals, a partnership firm (hereinafter referred to as 'the firm'), of which opposite party no ..... enlarge the field of operation of the state financial corporation and to meet the growing needs of industries to offer financial assistance to augment the resources sufficiently, the act has been amended to enable the corporation to transact new kindsi of business like guarantee loan raised by the industrial concern from scheduled banks and guarantee default payment due ..... that rule, not only to get the highest price for the property but also to ensure fairness in the activities of the state and public authorities. they should undoubtedly act fairly. their actions should be legitimate, their dealings should be above board. their transactions should be without aversion or affection. nothing should be suggestive of discrimination. nothing should .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 05 1990 (HC)

Govinda Chandra Mishra Vs. the Superintendent, Government Ayurvedic Ph ...

Court : Orissa

Reported in : AIR1992Ori37; 69(1990)CLT674

..... name or in the name of any other member of his family or firm with whom he is associated having coparcenary or partnership interest. on the basis of this order dated 16-3-1985 (annexure 22) another order was also issued on that day (annexure 23) blacklisting the petitioner. aggrieved by the same ..... listed the petitioner and prohibited to enter into any contract with government ayurvedic pharmacy, bolangir or any other hospital or dispensary or institution under the control of the directorate of indian medicine and homeopathy, orissa for a period of five years. in the order, it was stated that no contract shall be entered into with the petitioner either in his own ..... amount should not be recovered or adjusted from out of the pending bills. if such opportunity would have been given, petitioner might have explained that the officers purchasing did not act fairly and paid higher price or that by the time of purchase the said articles were available with the petitioner for supply and if opportunity would have been given, he .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 17 1990 (HC)

Omprakash Agarwala Vs. State Bank of India and ors.

Court : Orissa

Reported in : AIR1991Ori98

..... 'ment also and i find sufficient force in the same. the plaintiff in the plaint had made a categorical assertion that for the purpose of business of the partnership firm (defendant no. 1), defendant no. 2 executed an agreement for cash credit on security of pledge of goods, produce and merchandise dated 28th of november, ..... of india has been decreed to the extent of rs. 16,245.44 paise.2. plaintiffs case in brief is the defendant no. 1 is a partnership firm of which defendants 2 to 5 are partners. the defendants approached the plaintiff for cash credit accommodation and the plaintiff granted a cash credit accommodation to ..... stated in paragraph 13 of the plaint.10. mr. sinha, the learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff bank, then urges that section 25(3) of the indian contract act would save the period of limitation, inasmuch as under ext. 15 dated 21-5-1974, defendant. no. 4 who is also one of the partners had ..... the matter, i am unable to accept mr. sinha's contention and hold that section 25(3) of the indian contract act does not come into play.11. mr. misra for the appellant had advanced also the argument that ext. 3 had not been executed by defendant no. ..... an express promise by defendant no. 4 to pay a barred debt. therefore, the condition precedent for applying sub-section (3) of section 25 of the indian contract act has not been satisfied by virtue of ext. 15. that apart, such a case had not at all been pleaded in the plaint. in that view of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 12 1990 (HC)

Ramsewak Kashinath Vs. SarafuddIn and ors.

Court : Orissa

Reported in : AIR1991Ori51; 71(1991)CLT49

..... ). on 28-2-1986, the learned trial judge came to hold that the plaintiffs suit was not maintainable for want of registration of the partnership firm as it was hit by section 69 of the indian partnership act. on 5-3-1986, the plaintiff filed an application objecting to the maintainability of the defendants' counter-claim after dismissal of the plaintiffs suit. the said ..... by the rules applicable to plaints.'it may be noted that this provision was not there in the civil procedure code of 1908 and was brought by way of amendment by amending act of 1976 which was given effect to with effect from 1-2-1977.5. so far as first submission of mr. basu is concerned, it depends upon an interpretation of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 09 1990 (HC)

JaIn Mills and Electrical Stores Vs. State of Orissa and ors.

Court : Orissa

Reported in : AIR1991Ori117

..... the date of issue of section 80, c.p.c. notice, by virtue of the provisions of section 70 of the indian contract act. chapter v of the indian contract act comprises of only five sections, from sections 68 to 72. the chapter is headed 'of certain relations resembling those created by contract ..... sum of rs. 24,099.58.2. the plaintiffs' case may be briefly stated as follows:the plaintiffs are the partners representing the registered partnership firm m/s. jain mills and electrical stores which deals in electrical goods and supplies electrical equipments, appliances and materials to government and semi- ..... supplied by the plaintiffs, whether they are entitled to claim the relief prayed for in the suit by invoking the provisions of section 70 of the indian contract act? (3) as the defendants have not paid the price for the plaint 'a' schedule goods, in spite of repeated demands by the plaintiffs ..... the contract altogether. the contract of sale in the present case is governed by the provisions of the indian sale of goods act, 1930 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act'). section 42 of the act provides:'the buyer is deemed to have accepted the goods when he intimates to the seller that he ..... so the plaintiffs' claim that they are entitled to the reliefs prayed for by invoking section 70 is not legally tenable. the trial court acted illegally in invoking the provision under section 70 while granting the relief to the plaintiffs. perhaps the plaintiffs also were aware of the non-applicability .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 20 1990 (HC)

Sri Hara Prasad Hota Vs. Batliboy and Co. Private Ltd. and ors.

Court : Orissa

Reported in : 1991(I)OLR70

..... no. 1 batliboy and co. private limited filed. money suit no. 3688 of 1969 agamit the opposite party no. davaloy trading house, a partnership firm registered under the indian partnership act in the calcutta high-court and obtained a decree for realisation of rs. 1,05,645.85 with interest at the rate of 6 per ..... between themselves. when the decree is passed, it is against the firm. such a decree is capable of being executed against the property of the partnership and also against two classes of persons individually. they are (sic) persons who appeared in answer to summons served on them as partners and either ..... writing given at the time of such service, whether he is served as a partner or as a person having the control or management of. the ; partnership business, or in both characters and, in default of such notice, the person served shall be deemed to be served as a partneras provided under rule ..... .6. for proper appreciation of the matter it is necessary to notice some provisions of the civil procedure code which deal with suits and execution cases relating to partnership firms. order 30, c. p. c. contains the provisions regarding suits by or against firms and persons carrying on bisiness in names other than their ..... to realise the decretal dues from him and to take coercive process for that purpose.5. as noticed earlier, the suit was filed against the partnership firm only. the petitioner had not been impleaded in the suit as a partner of the firm or in any other capacity. but in the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 20 1991 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. S.L. Agarwala and Co.

Court : Orissa

Reported in : (1992)101CTR(Ori)222; [1992]197ITR239(Orissa)

..... compass. in its return of income for the assessment year 1980-81, m/s. s. l. agarwala & co., a partnership firm (hereinafter referred to as ' the assessee'), claimed deduction under section 32a of the act on the footing that its machinery is used for the purpose of manufacture or production of articles and things. according to the ..... the tribunal and the reference has been made to this court under section 256(1) as indicated above.2. ' investment allowance' is granted under section 32a of the act. sub-section (1) requires that the machinery or plant (a) should be owned by the assessee, (b) should be wholly used for the purposes of the ..... in cit v. m. r. gopal : [1965]58itr598(mad) . the said decision was rendered with reference to the exemption granted under section 15c of the indian income-tax act, 1922. the tribunal observed that the language used in section 15c is similar to that of section 32a(2) of the ..... a. pasayat, j.1. at the instance of the revenue, the following question has been referred under section 256(1) of the income-tax act, 1961 (for short' the act'), by the income-tax appellate tribunal, cuttack bench, cuttack (for short, ' the tribunal'), for adjudication :' whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the ..... act and, therefore, the use of crane to convert big iron ingots into small pieces of iron constituted a manufacturing activity, and the two products were .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 22 1991 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. T. Omer and Company

Court : Orissa

Reported in : (1992)102CTR(Ori)36; [1992]196ITR736(Orissa)

..... any part in the specified item of the property did not arise. the contention of learned standing counsel appears to be legally sound.5. a partnership-firm under the indian partnership act, 1932 (hereinafter referred to as 'the partnership act'), is not a distinct legal entity apart from the partners constituting it and equally in law the firm as such has no separate rights of its ..... own in the partnership assets and when one talks of the firm's property or the firm's assets, all that is meant is property or assets ..... partner may assign his share to another. but what is permissible in that regard is laid down in section 29(1) of the partnership act, that is to say, the right to receive the share of profits of the assignor and accept the account of profits agreed to by the partners. a similar view expressed ..... have a joint or common interest, (see malabar fisheries co. v. cit : [1979]120itr49(sc) .)6. the provisions of sections 14, 15, 29, 32, 37, 38 and 48 of the partnership act, 1932, make it clear that whatever may be the character of the property which is brought in by the partners when the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 20 1992 (HC)

Ladi Vyakuntam and ors. Vs. Gumudi Chittibabu

Court : Orissa

Reported in : 73(1992)CLT776; 1992(II)OLR157

..... icc case no. 17 of 1988 under section 199 read with section 34 of the indian penal code, petitioner no. 1 and the opp. party are the partners of 'jyoti rice and flour mill'. since they had dispute relating to their partnership business, the matter was referred to a body of arbitrators consisting of 4 persons, ..... is made touching any point material to the object for which the declaration was made, that would constitute an offence under section 199 ipc. in view of section 5 of the arbitration act, the notice by opposite party would not disentitle the arbitrators to proceed further in the arbitration proceeding. it was therefore, unnecessary to antedate ..... or test the vilidity of the said allegations. (see : tula ram v. kishore singh, air 1977 sc 240'.). taking cognizance is the thereshold act of judicial proceeding relating to an offence. ' xx xx 'in paragraph-6 of the said judgment, the court further held as follows :'since the ..... act of taking cognizance is not a matter of empty formality, a revisional court can interfere with an order of the magistrate to issue process ( ..... statement or declaration need be proved touching any point material to the object for which the declaration was made.5. under the arbitration act section 5 provides that the authority of an appointed arbitrator or umpire shall not be revocable except with the leave of the court, .....

Tag this Judgment!


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