Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act Sorted by: old Page 7 of about 37,648 results (0.123 seconds)

Apr 22 1948 (PC)

Vimala and Co. Vs. Sivam and Co., by Partners, N.K.M.S.P. Valliyappa C ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1948)2MLJ477

..... application may be briefly stated. the plaintiffs are stock and share brokers carrying on business in the name of vimala & co. the defendants messrs. sivam & co. are a partnership firm registered under the indian partnership act; there are three partners in the firm: (1) n.k.m.s.p. valliyappa chettiar, (2) m.s. chockalingam chettiar and (3) k.rm.t.t.v. vedachalam ..... the firm was dissolved and that under an arrangement between the partners the first partner, i.e., valliyappa chettiar, was the sole person liable to pay all claims against the partnership including the suit claim.2. the present application is filed by the plaintiff for striking out the defence. in the affidavit filed in support of the application it is alleged ..... of the partners in the this case the procedure prescribed under order 30 has been adopted and therefore the plaintiff is within his legal rights in suing the partnership in the name of the firm alone.4. the firm was also served in the prescribed manner, that is by serving the notice upon the respondent who is one of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 17 1948 (PC)

Kasi Alias Alagappa Chettiar and ors. Vs. Rm. A. Rm. V. Ramanathan Che ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1949)1MLJ298

..... to the relative provisions of the indian contract act and the trusts act. we do not consider that either the english partnership act of 1890 or the indian partnership act of 1932 which was modelled on the english act, has effected any radical change in the law applicable to any of the matters in controversy in the ..... to the accountability of a surviving partner to the representatives of a deceased partner. the dissolution of the rm. p. firm having taken place in 1927, the provisions of the indian partnership act which came into force in 1932 are, it is contended, inapplicable to a determination of the rights of the parties in the present case and resort must be had only ..... 42 of the english act, has made provision for these cases, giving a right to the deceased partner's representative, in the absence of a contract to the contrary in ..... sections 46 and 48 of the partnership act.21. various and difficult questions arise where the surviving partners, instead of winding up the firm, carry on the business with the assets and property of the dissolved firm, without any final settlement of accounts as between them and the representatives of a deceased partner. section 37 of the indian partnership act which is modelled on section .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 04 1949 (PC)

Ediga Hanumanthappa and anr. Vs. Eeranti Seethayya and Company Consist ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1949)2MLJ217

..... of the firm are agents as well as principals. the definition of 'partnership' in section 4 of the indian partnership act (ix of 1932) is an epigrammatic statement of this established rule. section 19 (1) of the same act lays down that the act of a partner which is done to carry on, in the usual ..... way, business of the kind carried on by the firm, binds the firm. persons who have entered into partnership ..... at the time of the payment and discharge.4. taking the case of partners, which is the case on hand, section 18 of the partnership act declares what has always been understood as a principle of universal application that a partner is the agent of the firm for the purposes of the ..... has ceased. two illustrations are appended to this section, which are interesting, it may be mentioned here that the corresponding section of the indian limitation act of 1877 (act xv of 1877), namely, section 8, ran as follows:when one of several joint creditors or claimants is under any such disability, and ..... for construing order 21, rules 1 and 2, civil procedure code, as abrogating pro tanio or overriding the substantive law of partnership and agency.22. the enactment of section 7 of the limitation act is a legislative recognition of the view that under the substantive law, one joint decree-holder might give a .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 30 1949 (PC)

F.W. Heilgers and Co. Vs. Nagesh Chandra Chakravarty

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1950)52BOMLR23

..... is an appeal from a judgment of the high court of judicature at fort william in bengal. the appellant (petitioner) is a firm registered under the indian partnership act and carries on btisiness in calcutta inter alia as the managing agent of the titagarh paper mills company, ltd., and other companies. at all material ..... was not pressed before, us. mr. chaudhury, who appeared for the appellant, based his whole contention on the wording of the payment of wages act (act iv of 1936). he contended that the claim to payment of all the three kinds of bonus could not be considered because it violated the provisions ..... the high court for the issue of writs of certiorari and prohibition and for an order, in effect, under section 45 of the specific relief act.2. before the high court various contentions were raised by the parties but they were not all argued before us. it appears that before the ..... should be considered to exist for the subsequent years. on february 6, 1948, the government of west bengal made an order under the industrial disputes act, 1947, referring the dispute for adjudication to the industrial tribunal consisting of shri nagesh chandra chakravarty. in spite of the protest of the appellant firm, ..... ,400 workmen and 370 clerks. early in december, 1946, two trade unions of the company's employees were formed and registered under the trade unions act. on march 14, 1947, there was a strike which continued up to may 23, 1947. the employees claimed from the company bonus for work .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 27 1949 (PC)

C.T. Ramanathan Chettiar Vs. A.R.L.N.L.N. Ramanathan Chettiar

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1949)2MLJ751

..... to secure a debt incurred in the course of the business. he relied on the analogy furnished by sections 45 and 47 of the indian partnership act which substantially reproduced the corresponding provisions of the english act and on the decision in in re clough : bradford commercial banking co. v. cure (1885) 31 ch. d. 324 and ..... .r. 61 i.a. 257 : (1934) 67 m.l.j. 167 : l.r. 61 i.a. 257. we need hardly point out that the partnership act as such has no application to a joint hindu family business and a trade or business is like any other asset of the joint family subject to the rules of ..... joint undivided family. in a later case, the judicial committee observed that it was open to the members of a joint family to enter into a partnership in respect of a portion of the joint family property--a sugar factory in that case--after dividing that item into specific shares. there was no ..... m.l.j. 214 and ramachandrappa v. narayanappa : air1940mad339 . both these decisions recognise that it is not possible to apply the principles of the law of partnership to a joint family business and that, apart from any question of estoppel by holding out, a junior member of the family after partition is not in the ..... extends to a sale; and it also extends to giving a mortgage on any particular part of the property belonging to the partnership to secure in good faith one of the partnership debts. this statement of the law considered in tlie context in which it occurs, means that the transaction is incidental to and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 12 1949 (PC)

Babulal Dhandhania Vs. Gauttam and Co.

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!

Sep 27 1949 (PC)

Hardutt Ray Gajadhar Ram Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax.

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : [1950]18ITR106(All)

..... is incapable of 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 of the indian partnership the deed of partition dated the 15th september, 1932, it is mentioned that benarsi lal had in sambat 1982 adopted jagdish prasad and in 1983 sundar mal died and ..... , in the state of the evidence, to infer that, after the death of krishna, the appellant, though a minor, was admitted to the benefits of the partnership in terms of section 247 of the indian contract act. ramesam, j., state : we must therefore infer, in the absence of any member of the family giving us information on the point, that the mother agreed ..... admitted as a partner of the firm or was he admitted to the benefits of partnership ?(2) if krishna murari was admitted as a partner, could such a deed of partnership be registered under section 26a of the indian income-tax act, 1922, and the rules made under the act and(3) whether the application dated 23rd july, 1943, was in order regard being had ..... to rules 2-6b of the indian income-tax rules, 1922 ?'the facts briefly are that gajadhar ram .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 22 1950 (HC)

Prithvisingh Devising Vs. Hasan Alli Vazirkhan

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1951Bom6; (1950)52BOMLR862; ILR1951Bom101

..... court went on to discuss the reason of the rule by trying to distinguish the terms of section 80, civil p. c., and section 69(2), partnership act, by going behind the plain words of those sections and trying to divine what was the reason of the rule enacted in those respective sections. this was ..... way as if the suit had originally been instituted with leave. ram lall j. in the course of his judgment incidentally considered the provisions ofsection 69, partnership act, and observed at p. 295 that the right to enforce a claim was granted by a decree and if the condition for theenforcement of that remedy was ..... and the provisions thereof had been laid down as explicit and mandatory. they observed that section 80, civil p. c. had very much in common with section 69, partnership act, and came to the conclusion, as venkataramana bao j. had done in the case of girdharilal son & co. v. kappini gowder : (1988)2mlj44 that subsequent ..... in the register of firms as partners in the firm.' there is no decided case of our high court on the construction of section 69(2), partnership act. speaking for myself, i may say that this point has been urged before the judges of the original side of this high court on a number ..... referred it to a division bench. the appeal has accordingly come up before us for hearing and final disposal.3. the terms of section 69(2), partnership act, may be set out at this stage, and they are:'no suit to enforce a right arising from a contract shall be instituted in any court by .....

Tag this Judgment!

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!

Oct 04 1950 (HC)

State Vs. Basdeo

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1951All44

..... become partners.'sir john beaumont delivering the judgment of the judicial committee in bhagwanji morarji goculdasv. alembic chemical works co. ltd. :'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 respect being more in accordance ..... in bhagwanji morarji v. alembic chemical works, ltd. . reliance is placed on these observations of their lordships of the judicial committee :'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 respect being more in ..... persons constituting it, and that the entity continues so long as the firm 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 that respect being more in ..... associated individuals, a fictitious being which in a manner represents them, but is not identical with them.'42. mr. pathak has referred to the various sections of the indian partnership act to show that a partner has been considered to be distinct from a firm. there cannot be any dispute about it. an individual partner is distinct from the firm, .....

Tag this Judgment!

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