Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act Sorted by: old Page 6 of about 36,614 results (0.255 seconds)

Mar 27 1945 (PC)

Penumatsa Rangaraju Vs. Sait Devichand Bhootaji Firm Partner Sait Sesh ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1945Mad439; (1945)2MLJ113

..... firm. and it is recited in the note itself that the money was borrowed for the purposes of the partnership business. in these circumstances, there can be no question but that under sections 19 and 22 of the indian partnership act, 1932, the debt is binding on the firm, but the suit having been based solely on the note ..... , the question arises as to whether the note has been executed in such a form as to make the petitioner also liable on the note as a partner. section 27 of the negotiable instruments act enacts ..... not sufficient that they are done in any other manner expressing or implying an intention to bind the firm, which, under section 22 of the partnership act, would otherwise be sufficient to bind the firm, for the latter section must yield to the special provisions of the negotiable instruments ..... by his partner, the first defendant. the court below has found that the first defendant was the managing partner of a rice. mill business carried on in partnership with the second defendant and others under the name of sri kusumaharinadha rice mill at amalapuram in east godavari district, and that the money was borrowed for ..... act.3. it is not, however, necessary that the note should be signed by the partner in the name of the firm but the name .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 10 1945 (PC)

Sohrabji Dhunjibhoy Medora Vs. the Oriental Government Security Life A ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1946)48BOMLR123

..... up under the indian companies act, 1913, or to which the indian partnership act, 1932, applies;[(9) 'insurer' is defined in terms which include the respondents but is expressed not to .include an insurance agent licenced under section 42 or a ..... or their predecessors in the years 1892, 1899, and 1917.5. in the year 1892 the respondents who were then, and still are, a company registered in bombay under the indian companies act carrying on business of life insurance, were mended to appoint one d, j. medora, the father, of the present appellants, who carried on business in the name of d ..... premiums on life policies effected through their agency after the termination of their appointment.(4) whether the appellants were entitled to commission on renewal premiums under the provisions of the indian insurance act (iv of 1938) after the termination of their appointment.(5) whether the appellants were entitled to retain and cash a cheque for; rs. 75,000 sent to them ..... of the contract under the indian insurance act of 1938 which came into force on july 1, .1939. the material provisions of that act as modified up to july 28, 1941, are the following:-section 2. in this act, unless there is anything repugnant in the subject or context,-(8) 'insurance company' means any insurer being a company, association or partnership which may be wound .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 10 1945 (PC)

Sohrabji Dhunjibhoy Medora and Another Vs. the Oriental Government Sec ...

Court : Privy Council

..... wound up under the indian companies act, 1913, or to which the indian partnership act, 1932, applies; ((9) "insurer" is defined in terms which include the respondents but is expressed not to include an insurance agent licensed under s. 42 ..... on life policies effected through their agency after the termination of their appointment. (4) whether the appellants were entitled to commission on renewal premiums under the provisions of the insurance act (act 4, [iv] of 1938) after the termination of their appointment. (5) whether the appellants were entitled to retain and cash a cheque for rs. 75,000 sent ..... other remuneration in consideration of his soliciting or procuring insurance business. section 40. (1) no person shall, after the expiry of six months from the commencement of this act, pay or contract to pay any remuneration or reward whether by way of commission or otherwise for soliciting or procuring insurance business in india to any person except an ..... contract under the indian insurance act of 1938 which came into force on 1st july 1939. the material provisions of that act as modified up to 28th july 1941, are the following: "section 2. in this act, unless there is anything repugnant in the subject or context * * * * * * (8) "insurance company" means any insurer being a company, association or partnership which may be .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 07 1947 (PC)

Shanmugha Mudaliar Vs. P.V. Rathina Mudaliar and anr.

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1948Mad187; (1947)2MLJ241

..... died before the suit the second defendant was joined by way of abundant caution. the only other material fact to be recorded is that the partnership was never registered as required by section 58 of the indian partnership act.3. the suit was instituted in the court of the additional district munsiff of ami. by his written statement the first defendant made a number ..... affect any right or power to realise the property of a dissolved firm. it is to be noticed that the indian partnership act places no prohibition upon an unregistered partnership making contracts either between the partners inter se or with some third party nor upon an unregistered partnership acquiring property or assets. all that it does is to make a suit instituted by an unregistered ..... of pleas one of which was that the suit was not maintainable by reason of the provisions of section 69 of the partnership act, particularly sub-section 2 which provides ..... lower court, followed that decision and the appeal failed.4. sub-sections (1) and (2) of section 69 of the partnership act forbid the institution of a suit to enforce a right arising from a contract in respect of a partnership when the partnership is not registered. sub-section (3) of the same section, however, provides that the provisions of sub-sections (1) and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 29 1947 (PC)

Lala Lachhman Das Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Punjab, N.W.F. and D ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1948)50BOMLR543

..... nature 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.authority for this proposition, it would appear, was to be found in mayne's hindu law, 9th edn., p. 398, and in a decision of this board ..... for a reference to the high court. in that application it was stated that the following questions of law arose:(1) can there be a partnership within the meaning of section 2 (6b) of the indian income-tax act, 1922, between a hindu undivided family as such on the one part and one of its undivided members in his individual capacity on the ..... -annas share of the profits had been allocated to daulat ram ; there was no written instrument of partnership, but it had been shown before the tribunal that a certificate of registration of the firm was granted by the registrar of firms under the indian income-tax act on march 2, 1938. the case further stated that the suggestion that daulat ram was simply ..... other part?(2) even if such a partnership was permissible in law, is there any evidence on record in this case to show the existence of such .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 24 1947 (PC)

Sherbanubai Jafferbhoy Vs. Hooseinbhoy Abdoolabhoy

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1948Bom292; (1948)50BOMLR89

..... signed in march 1946.28. the third objection which has been made to the validity of the award turns on section 48 of the indian partnership act. section 48 of the indian partnership act provides that the assets of the firm, including any sums contributed by the partners to make up deficiencies of capital, shall be applied in ..... of opinion that there is an error of law patent on the face of the award in so far as this provision of section 48 of the indian partnership act is flouted in the terms of the award.29. as a result of the above, i have come to the conclusion that the award of the ..... or that there was any agreement arrived at between the parties which would be an agreement as required by the provisions of section 48 of the indian partnership act. it was further argued that the assets were of a negligible value and that therefore when the arbitrator awarded the assets to the first respondent under ..... rs. 34,180 and that there was no provision made in the award as it should have been done if the terms of section 48 of the indian partnership act were adhered to, for paying the debts to third parties before any part of the assets could be handed over to respondent no. 1. it was ..... had no jurisdiction to make such a provision in the award. now, the position with regard to that contention is this. under section 46 of the indian partnership act when there is a dissolution every partner has the statutory right to have the assets of the firm applied in payment of the debts and liabilities of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 17 1947 (PC)

Govindan Nair Vs. Nagabhushanammal and anr.

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1948Mad343; (1948)1MLJ331

..... illustration in my opinion exactly applies to the facts of the present case. the same distinction is provided by explanation 1 to section 6 of the indian partnership act, which reads as follows:the sharing of profits or of gross returns arising from property by persons holding a joint or common interest in that property does ..... not of itself make such person partners.4. as stated already it is very difficult to apply the definition of partnership contained in section 4 of the act to the facts of the present case as the plaintiff and the first defendant did not carry on any business in respect of tea ..... plaintiff and the first defendant are joint owners. even according to the facts as alleged by the plaintiff the relationship constituted by them would not be a partnership. nothing more is done by the parties than utilising the common property and obtaining a return for such use by leasing the property for rent. the ..... at page 32,if each owner does nothing more than take his share of the gross returns obtained by the use of the common property, partnership is not the result.2. at page 33 the learned author observes,moreover, part owners who divide what is obtained by the use or ..... shop except leasing the common property for rent. i am therefore of opinion that in this case the essentials that go to constitute the relationship of partnership are .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 28 1948 (PC)

In Re: Swaranath Bhatia

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1948Mad427; (1948)1MLJ219

..... entities as a corporation created by a royal charter or a co-operative society or other bodies which do not come within the definition of the term ' company.'5. a partnership as defined in the indian partnership act is not a corporate body because it has no existence separate from its members. a body corporate is a juristic person legally authorised to ..... parti-cularly owing to the nature of the rights and liabilities of a partner in a partnership known under the indian partnership act, i am inclined to hold that the words ' other body corporate ' cannot apply to a partnership registered or unregistered. the view of the lower court that a partnership is a ' company ' is patently unsound.7. i may add that the prosecution has not ..... act as a single individual and partakes of the nature of an artificial person created by a royal charter or an act of the legislature and having authority to preserve certain rights in perpetual succession ..... fail in process of time. the several members of the corporation and their successors constitute but one person in law. apart from the partners, the partnership has no legal existence (sections 24 and 25 of the partnership act). in view of these definitions and especially because of the word ' other ' in rule 122 denoting thereby that the body corporate must be something .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 26 1948 (PC)

Bhagwanji Morarji Goculdas Vs. the Alembic Chemical Works Company, Lim ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1948)50BOMLR499

..... exists and continues to carry on its business. it is true that the indian partnership act goes further than the english partnership act, 1890, in recognising that a firm may possess a personality distinct from the persons constituting it ; the law in india in ..... lordships think that the decisions of the courts in india upon this point were right.10. before the board it was argued that under the indian partnership act, 1932, a firm is recognised as an entity apart from the persons constituting it, and that the entity continues so long as the firm ..... a firm possesses a distinct personality does not involve that the personality continues unchanged so long as the business of the firm continues. the indian act, like the english act, avoids making a firm a corporate body enjoying the right of perpetual succession. the agreement of december 7, 1907, was made between ..... in the trial court and before this board some reliance was placed on section 87b(c) of the indian companies act. that sub-clause was introduced into the companies act by the amending act of 1986. the sub-clause renders a transfer of his office by a managing agent void unless approved by ..... that such agreement had come to an end, and informing the firm that the then firm of kotibhasker, amin and company was not entitled to act as secretaries, treasurers and agents of the company and to be paid remuneration as such. after some correspondence between the parties this suit was filed .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 26 1948 (PC)

Bhagwanji Morarji Goculdas Vs. Alembic Chemical Works Co. Ltd. and Oth ...

Court : Privy Council

..... and continues to carry on its business. it is true that the indian partnership act goes further than the english partnership act, 1890, in recognising that a firm may possess a personality distinct from the persons constituting it; the law in india in that ..... think that the decisions of the courts in india upon this point were right. [10] before the board it was argued that under the indian partnership act, 1932, a firm is recognised as an entity apart from the persons constituting it, and that the entity continues so long as the firm exists ..... firm possesses a distinct personality does not involve that the personality continues unchanged so long as the business of the firm continues. the indian act, like the english act, avoids making a firm a corporate body enjoying the right of perpetual succession. the argeement of 7th december 1907 was made between the ..... the appellant was to be regarded as an original partner. their lordships agree with the learned trial judge that this section of the companies act has no application to the present case. it places the appellant in the position of an original partner for the purposes of the proviso but ..... that such agreement had come to an end, and informing the firm that the then firm of kotibhasker, amin and company was not entitled to act as secretaries, treasurers and agents of the company and to be paid remuneration as such. after some correspondence between the parties this suit was filed .....

Tag this Judgment!


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