Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act Sorted by: old Court: punjab and haryana Page 1 of about 1,697 results (0.044 seconds)

Oct 03 1950 (HC)

Sohan Lal Vs. Firm Madho Ram Banwari Lal and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1952P& H240

..... portion of section 19 read : '18. subject to the provisions of this act, apartner is the agent of the firm for the purposesof the business of the flrm.'19 (1) subject ..... to bind his firm by agreeing to refer disputes to arbitration does not govern indian merchants carrying on business at kot kapura or moga 'mandi'. in any case, considering that in the indian partnership act, 1872, there was no provision corresponding to sub-section(2) of section 19 of the act i find that air 1924 sind 29 does not govern the case. indeed, subsection ..... (2) of section 16 of the act has no statutory precedent and the legislature appears to have reproduced in section ..... partner is 'praposi-tus negotiis sociatatis' and binds the other partners by his acts in all matters which are within the scope and objects of the partnership and has authority to submit a dispute relating to the business of the firm to arbitration.9. sections 18 and 19 of the indian partnership act 1932, are relevant to the argument raised. section 18 and the material .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 22 1951 (HC)

Parmeshwar Lal and Co. Vs. Jai Narain

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1952P& H373

..... the petitioners have submitted in the first instance that basheshar lal had no authority to refer the matter to arbitration as under section 19 of the indian partnership act one partner has not the implied authority to submit a dispute relating to the business of a firm to arbitration. there would be a great deal ..... force in this contention, but the circumstances show that the other partners were aware of the arbitration proceedings and they must be taken to have ratified the act of their co-partner basheshar lal. it was held in the judgment of achhru ram j., in 'hanuman chamber of commerce ltd. v. jassa ram ..... brought.6. an objection is taken by the learned counsel for the respondent that no appeal lies against this order. under section 39 of the arbitration act appeal lies on various grounds. an order setting aside or refusing to set aside an award is appealable under section 39. the learned judge has remitted ..... express or implied authority from his other partners, there is nothing to prevent such other partners from ratifying his act which was unauthorised at its inception. ratification need not be by any express act or declaration and may be implied from conduct. it may be inferred from mere acquiescence or silence or inaction ..... which were signed by basheshar lal and jai narain. by this dwarka das was appointed the arbitrator. as he refused to act, shiv narain shankar, an advocate, was appointed the arbitrator on the 14th may 1948, again by the same two persons basheshar lal .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 26 1951 (HC)

Debi Parshad Vs. Jai Ram Dass and anr.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1952P& H284

..... the contrary intention appears, property and rights and interests in property acquired with money belonging to the firm are deemed to have been acquired for the firm.'29. in the indian partnership act by pollock and mulla 1st edition at page 40 the statement of law on the point under consideration is stated to be that land bought in the name of one ..... concerned, that the agreement was to share the profits of business and that the business was carried on by all or any of the persons concerned acting for all. in this connection, section 4 of the indian partnership act may be seen. in the present case debi parshad admitted in the written statement that there was an agreement entered into by the plaintiff and ..... nos. 15 and 16 of the written statement of defendant no. 1? (4) which is the accounting party? (5) whether section 69 of the indian partnership act would bar the present suit? (6) what is the date when the partnership shall be deemed to be dissolved? (7) whether the accounts up to the 31st of december, 1947, have been settled finally and what is ..... it is shown that there was an agreement between the parties to share the profits, in the absence of other circumstances, partnership should be held to be established whereas section 6 of the indian partnership act, 1932, hereinafter referred to as the act, enacts that receipt by a person of a share of profits of a business does not of itself make him a partner .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 17 1953 (HC)

Banka Mal Lajja Ram and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1953P& H270; [1953]24ITR150(P& H)

..... relevant for the purposes of this case.as the income-tax law now stands under section 2(6b) 'firm', 'partner' and 'partnership' have the same meanings respectively as in the indian partnership act, 1932 (9 of 1932), provided that fhe expression 'partner' includes any person who being a minor has been admitted to the benefits ..... of partnership.9. on behalf of the assessee it was first submitted that the partnership deed in the present case should be so ..... entering into a contract, the contract on his behalf is void subject to such benefits that he may be entitled to get under section 30, partnership act.'and in the latter case what was held was that a widow on the death of her husband was not the karta of an undivided hindu ..... the assessee'. and the question as it was ordinarily framed has been submitted for the opinion of this court.8. according to section 30, partnership act, a person who is a minor cannot be a partner in a firm but with the consent of all the partners he may be admitted to ..... do not think it necessary to discuss these cases any further.15. as i have said before, under section 30, partnership act a minor cannot be a full fledged partner in a partnership firm and therefore the contract entered into making a minor a partner would be invalid and cannot be registered under section 26a .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 16 1954 (HC)

Dr. V.S. Bahal Vs. S.L. Kapur and Co.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1956P& H24

..... second appeals.2. the only point now raised in the appeals is whether the suits could proceed in view of the provisions of section 69(2), indian partnership act, which reads:'69(2) -- no suit to enforce a right arising from a contract shall be instituted in any court by or on behalf of ..... was a partner of the firm it ought to have been held that he was one of the persons suing within the meaning of section 69(2), partnership act, and that, therefore, it was necessary, for the suit to be instituted at all, that his name should be shown as a partner in the register ..... expired, the suit should be dismissed.in the first place the words of section 171, companies act are not identical with those of section 69, partnership act, and the observation that the proceedings in a suit brought by an unregistered partnership firm are validated by registration of the firm 'pendente lite' was simply an 'obiter dictum' ..... on the point we came to the conclusion that the view expressed by ram lall j. was wrong and, that in order to institutea suit a partnership must be a registered firm on the date on which the suit is instituted and thatsubsequent registration cannot validate the defect.9. the question which arises ..... in the name of harjas rai alone, who was to carry on his own business there.copies of these resolutions were sent to the registrar of partnerships in november 1942 under section 63 with an intimation that harjas rai had ceased to be a partner. thereafter in 1946 maharaj narian and feroze din .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 24 1955 (HC)

Firm Jaikishen Dass Jinda Ram and ors. Vs. Central Bank of India

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1960P& H1

..... a voluntary association of two or more persons to carry on as co-owners a business for profit. this conception of a partnership springs from the agreement on which it is founded and is supported by the indian partnership act which defines partnership as a relationship between the persons who have agreed to share the profits of a business carried on by all or any ..... debt or claim against a joint demand. but joint debts owing to and by the same person in the same right can be set off against each other (lindley on partnership page 374). the appellants who are partners are governed by the indian partnership act s. 25 of which makes it quite clear that partners are liable jointly as well as severally for all ..... of them acting for all. the use of the partnership name is of no value except in so far as it represents natural persons.(11 ..... acts binding on the firm. here a joint debt was owing to the appellants in their capacity as members of a firm, and another joint debt was owing by the appellants .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 12 1955 (HC)

Deva Sharma Vs. Laxmi NaraIn Gaddodia and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1956P& H49

..... in that it did not contain either any temporal or geographical limits and that the restraint, being in gross, was unreasonable and he has not discussed whether in section 54, indian partnership act the word 'similar' includes 'same'. this point has been briefly discussed by khosla j. in the following passage: 'the second objection was that the business carried on by the defendants ..... third party, the kan-pur cotton mills, neither of them separately would be allowed to take up the selling agency. moreover, although the english partnership act does not contain any section corresponding with section 54 of the indian act, it would seem that this section was drafted with a view to incorporating the principles evolved by the decisions of the courts in england, and ..... lengthy discussion as my two learned colleagues have done regarding local limits and reasonableness. if i had been of the opinion that the agreement was one covered by section 54, partnership act, and otherwise enforceable, i should have had no hesitation in holding that the agreement was not bad because it did not specify any local limits, since in my opinion the ..... geographical limits, the reasonableless of which is to be determined with regard to the nature of the business. a further modification of the general principle is provided in section 54, partnership act which reads: 'partners may, upon or in anticipation of the dissolution of the form, make an agreement that some or all of them will not carry on a business similar .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 15 1957 (HC)

Durga Das Nayyar Vs. Official Liquidator, Bombay Thread Mills Co. Ltd. ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1959P& H472

..... company ha should prove it in the ordinary way before the liquidator who would no doubt take into consideration the relevant provisions of the indian companies act and the indian partnership act for determining whether anything was due to durga das nayyar and whether he was entitled to preference over other creditors. 5. the ..... main argument addressed to me has been to the effect that the award has not in any way disposed of any property of the company, but has merely disposed of the assets of the partnership ..... , which were the property of the partnership and not of the company until disposed of by the award. i find, however, that para (4) of the awand orders ..... there-on which were attacked by the official liquidator of the company in an application under. s. 231 of the indian companies act of 1913. the learned district judge has held that the award and the decree contravened the provisions of section 227(2) of the ..... company and in my opinion this clearly amounts to disposing of the property of the company. 6. the provisions of section 227 (2) of the act rend : 'in the case of a winding up by or subject to the supervision of the court every disposition of the property, including actionable claims .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 18 1957 (HC)

Mansha Ram Vs. Tej Bhan

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1958P& H5

..... . faqir chand mital is, that on the proved and admitted facts of this case, the provisions of section 37 of the indian partnership act have no applicability. section 37 of the indian partnership act runs as under:--'where any member of a firm has died or otherwise ceased to be a partner, and the surviving or ..... the lower appellate court which were dismissed. he has again filed cross-objections in this court. the lower courts applying section 13(b) of the indian partnership act, have found that no contract has been proved according to which the share of the two partners in the profits and losses of their business ..... to account for these assets with interest thereon, apart from fraud or misconduct in the nature of fraud.'section 37 of the indian partnership act is modelled upon section 42 of the english partnership act 1890 which reads,42. (1) where any member of a firm has died or otherwise ceased to be a partner, and ..... three-fourths, and that of the plaintiff one-fourth, the profits and losses would in view of the provisions of section 13(b) of the indian partnership act, be shared equally and not in the ratio of three-fourths and one-fourth. the defendant's claim that he was entitled to interest at ..... the defendant in the firm, was three times more than that of plaintiff but in view of the provisions of section 13(b) of the indian partnership act, in the absence of the contract between the parties, the two partners mansa ram and tej bhan were entitled to share the profits and losses .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 04 1958 (HC)

Guran Ditta Mal and ors. Vs. Banna Mal Deceased Through SaIn Dass and ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1958P& H469

..... in many statutes wherein it is laid down that no suit can be instituted unless the plaintiff previously complies with certain conditions, e. g., section 80, civil procedure code, and section 69, indian partnership act. these provisions bar the institution of a suit unless the condition precedent to its institution has been complied with.these provisions are analogous to the present case wherein an order ..... the privy council in robert watson and co. v. collector of zillah raj shahye, 13 moo ind app 100 at p. 170 (pc) (d), that there is a proceeding in indian courts called a 'non-suit', which operates as a dismissal of the suit without barring the right of the party to litigate the matter in a fresh suit; but that .....

Tag this Judgment!


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