Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act Sorted by: old Page 8 of about 36,614 results (0.252 seconds)

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!

Dec 08 1950 (HC)

Bhola Nath Vs. Mt. Kaso Devi and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1951All601

..... & which on his bankruptcy passes to his trustee.' (lindley on partnership, edn. 10, pp. 415, 416).9. the law in india is not different. section 46, indian partnership act, defines the rights of patnrs. in the assets of a partnership on the dissolution of the partnership. it is as follows: --'on the dissolution of a firm ..... . the transferee's interest attaches to the proceeds which are in the hands of the receiver after payments of all the debts & liabilities of the partnership. the property in the hands of bhola nath, therefore, is not subject to the charge created by the decree in favour of mst. kaso devi ..... , but, speaking generally, is entitled, on a dissolution, to have the partnership property, whether land or not, sold, & the proceeds divided. of course, this is subject to a contract to the contrary.8. again at p. ..... has against the others are in many important respects different from, & less extensive than, those which one patnr. has against his co-patnrs.' (lindley on partnership, edn. 10, pp. 31-32).7. the important thing for our present purpose to note is that a patnr. has no right to partition in specie ..... between himself & co-owners, but not (except by virtue of the partition acts) to have it sold against their consent. a patur. has no right to partition in specie, but, speaking generally, is entitled, on a dissolution, to have the partnership property, whether land or not, sold, & the proceeds divided.(7) as .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 15 1951 (HC)

Sm. Lilabati Rana Vs. Lalit Mohan Dey and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : AIR1952Cal499

..... not, however, 'ipso facto' become partners in the business; the members of the joint family are not clothed with the rights and obligations of a partner, as defined by the indian partnership act. the authorities are now clear that'in such a case, the family as a unit does not become a partner, but only such of its members as in fact entered ..... into a contractual relationship with the stranger; the partnership will be governed by the indian partnership act. (vide mayne's hindu law and usages, eleventh edition, section 308 quoted with approval by the judicial committee in 'ramkrishna v. ratan chand', 58 i a 173 ..... notice in writing is served on all the other partners, a suit brought by a partner for dissolution of the partnership, even on any of the grounds mentioned in section 44 of the indian partnership act would not be competent.8. chapter vi of the indian partnership act deals with the dissolution of a firm. dissolution may be in one of different ways. section 40 refers to ..... , even if proved, was not sufficient in law.6. reliance is placed in this connection on the provisions contained in section 43 of the indian partnership act, 1932, which is in the following terms:'43. (1) where the partnership is at will, the firm may be dissolved by any partner giving notice in writing to all the other partners of his intention to dissolve .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 26 1951 (HC)

Bhuban Mohan Das Vs. Surendra Mohan Das

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : AIR1951Cal69,55CWN541

..... criminal breach of trust by one patnr. as against the other in respect of partnership property.53. what is often forgotten in this context is that the indian partnership act is not a complete code on the law of partnership. it is a statute to define & amend the law relating to partnership. the act does not profess to consolidate the entire law on the subject. until dissolution ..... of partnership & accounts no specific item of property belongs to any particular patnr. as against the ..... . in the judgment of the learned chief justice, the nature of a patnr's property in the partnership assets has been discussed. that is the english law. that is also the indian law. the substance of the english law has been enacted in section 46, partnership act. section 46 is as follows :'on the dissolution of a firm every patnr. or his representative is ..... & accounts & until after losses & assets of the firm have been attended to in the manner laid down in the section. the same idea operates also in section 52, partnership act, where a contract creating partnership is rescinded on the ground of fraud or misrepresentation of any of the parties thereto. there again the party entitled to rescind has the right to a lien .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 26 1951 (HC)

Ladhuram Taparia Vs. B. K. Bagchi.

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : [1951]20ITR51(Cal)

..... petition that out of the above-named five firm four have been duly constituted under four registered deeds of partnership and the said firms have been registered under the indian partnership act. it appears that the respondent has also made five several assessment orders on the 29th of march, 1950, ..... ladhuram taparia on the 28th of february, 1941, and entered into a written agreement of partnership on the 16th of october, 1941. the firm of the petitioners was duly registered under the indian partnership act on the 19th july, 1943. the petitioner ladhuram had 8 as share and the petitioners ..... ganpat rai and bhairodan had 4 as share each in the said firm. the firm was first assessed to income-tax in respect of the year of assessment 1942-43 and for that purpose it was registered under section 26a of the indian income-tax act ..... officer issuing the notice of demand. it is submitted that the discretion conferred upon the income-tax officer under section 45 of the indian act should be exercised in a reasonable and judicious manner and not arbitrarily. it is further submitted that the power or the discretion conferred ..... of mandamus, prohibition and certiorari for an order cancelling the notice of demand issued by the respondent under section 29 of the indian income-tax act and calling upon him to forbear from taking further steps in respect of the said notice of demand and for quashing of .....

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!

Oct 10 1951 (HC)

Dhulia-amalner Motor Transport Ltd. Vs. Raychand Rupsi Dharamsi and or ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : [1952]22CompCas306(Bom)

..... of the company, a third person altogether.19. mr. purshottam for the plaintiff has referred the court to section 37 of the indian partnership act, section 67 of the indian trusts act, certain observations at pages 444 and 448 of aggarwala's indian trusts act and decisions in ahmed musaji saleji v. hashim ebrahim saleji, and ramlal thakursidas v. lakhmichand muniram. in my opinion, however, ..... question whether the resolution passed at the meeting of august 24, 1941, could amount to a statutory notice within the meaning of section 43 of the indian partnership act. the next general meeting of the partnership firm was held on december 25, 1941, and the pertinent resolution was resolution no. 1 which stated that immediate steps should be taken for making a ..... done by the union and that the company was really the same entity as the union but under a different name. relying on section 37 of the indian partnership act mr. purshottam has contended that the majority section of the partnership firm are using the artificial creation of the company as their agent for doing the business with the property of the ..... mr. purshottam for the respondents who constitute a minority section in the partnership firm has strenuously contended that the partnership firm has not been dissolved but is still continuing, that the requisite procedure for the dissolution of a partnership as prescribed by section 40 and 43 of the indian partnership act was not followed, that the business which was done by the private .....

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!

Dec 21 1951 (HC)

Ram Kumar Ram Chandra Vs. the Dominion of India

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1952All695

..... residing at naya ganj kanpur, partner of the firm'. in para. 1 of the plaint the applicant had stated 'that the plaintiffs are a partnership firm registered under the indian partnership act and lala ram kumar who has signed and verified the plaint, is registered partner of the firm.'2. on behalf of the defendant the allegation ..... .12. for the reasons stated above, it must be held that the suit was properly instituted and was not hit by section 69(2) of the partnership act and it was wrongly rejected on that ground by the trial court. in our opinion, therefore, this revision ought to be allowed, the decision of the ..... had n. r. nagpal any right to sue. it was further contended that the suit was not maintainable and liable to dismissal under the provisions of the partnership act. it was held in that suit that the firm was registered, but the name of n. r. nagpal was not shown in the register of firms ..... c.10. the present suit being by the firm and they firm having been registered the provisions of sub-section (2) of section 69 of the partnership act were fully complied with. in the circumstances, it was wholly unnecessary for the trial court to consider whether ram kumar was or was not a partner in ..... not proved that lala ram kumar was a partner in the firm. the suit was, accordingly, dismissed in view of the provisions of section 69(2), partnership act.3. the revision came up for hearing before a learned single judge of this court. he agreed with the opinion of the trial court that the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 28 1952 (HC)

S. Ahmed Khan Vs. Turup Mohamed Hayat

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : AIR1953Kant4; AIR1953Mys4

..... no substance in the contention either that the suit is not maintainable in the form in which it is brought or that section 69(1) of the indian partnership act is a bar to it.9. in the result, this appeal is allowed, the judgment and decree of the learned district judge_ are set aside and ..... govinda rao next contends that the plaintiff's suit even on the basis of such a claim is barred under section 69(1) of the indian partnership act as has been held by the learned district judge. section 69(1) provides that no suit to enforce a right arising from a contract or conferred by ..... paid the entire tax and sued the defendant for contribution. beaumont c.j. held that the language of sub-sections (1) and (2) of section 69, partnership act, is wide enough to cover suits relating to a dissolved firm and sub-section (1) covers a suit by a plaintiff suing in respect of a right ..... liability after or at the time of the dissolution. the claim for payment was therefore construed in that case as based on the relationship of partnership and arising directly under the provisions of the partnership act. that case was followed by grille j. of the nagpur high court in -- 'chhotelal nanakram v. gopaldas gulabdas' . he held ..... he had paid on behalf of the defendant under section 70 or section 69 of the contract act. but as the case stood the plaintiff had to base his claim on the relationship arising out of the partnership and he could not therefore recover.in that case there was also no agreement relied on between .....

Tag this Judgment!


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