Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jan-21-1916
Reported in : AIR1916Bom77; (1916)18BOMLR587
..... reaffirming the earlier mortgage, by the document f in the present case. that paper contains no allusion whatever to what was then an undoubtedly existing partnership between vaz and d'mello. it contains a list of all the press plant and a statement that that plant had been assigned by a writing ..... such as brewin and templeton, there cannot be the least doubt, i think, but that d'mello not only purchased a share in the partnership but immediately assumed predominant control of it and from the 3rd of october 1914 to the 19th of april 1915 was in effect the sole manager ..... on the 5th. i attach little or no importance to these matters. i am satisfied that d'mello gave valuable consideration for his share in the partnership, thenceforward intended to work the minto printing press. i am further satisfied that d'mello had no notice of the plaintiff's claim in october ..... loan secured by promissory-notes, on the other hand, the plaintiff contends that d'mello paid no consideration whatever for his half share in the partnership and that if any transaction of the kind actually occurred in october 1914,11 was entered into designedly in order to defraud him,5. a great ..... had no more than a right to the equity of redemption. for that altogether ignores the very salutary and necessary principle of section 178 of the indian contract act regulating what actually occurs when these mortgages of chattels are effected. the subject is doubtless confused by substituting the word ' mortgage' with all its .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Feb-11-1916
Reported in : 38Ind.Cas.278
..... was owned by. a hindu, joint family whereof the defendant raghumull was the karta. section 253, clause 10, of the indian contract act, which provides for the dissolution of a partnership on the death of a partner, must be read as qualified by the introductory words, 'in the absence of any ..... of an undivided hindu family, does not stand on precisely partnership arising out of contract. the rights and liabilities of co-parceners in a joint hindu family firm cannot be determined by exclusive reference to the indian contract act, but must be considered also with regard to the general rules ..... brokers knew about the insolvency of. the plaintiff; the fact of such knowledge is, i think, 'proved' within the meaning of the indian evidence act (section 5) which requires that the court should consider the existence of the disputed fact so probable that a prudent man ought, under the ..... of hindu law which regulate the transactions of such joint families; according to those rules, the death of one of the co-parceners does not dissolve a family partnership samalbhai nathubhai v. someshvar ..... the under-brokerage agreement recited the fact of the brokerage contract, and expressly stipulated in the first clause that the under-brokers would act during the subsistence of the brokerage agreement or for such additional period as the brokers and the company might further extend. business was carried .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Decided on : Apr-14-1916
Reported in : 34Ind.Cas.543
..... a partnership is entitled 'only to receive the share of profits to which the assigning partner would otherwise be entitled, and the assignee must ..... were directly-liable for any proportion of the partnership liabilities, such determination would be necessary in the adjustment between them and 1st plaintiff. this is not, in my opinion, sustainable. there is nothing regarding the relations between the sub-partners and partners in the indian contract act. section 31, however, of the english partnership act provides that the assignee of a share in ..... and it has not been shown how the right to relief alleged is in respect of or arises from the same act or transaction. what is the act or tranasaction? it is not the formation and dissolution of the sub-partnership, since they afforded no right of relief against the 1st defendant to 7th defendants; nor is it the dissolution of ..... accept the account of profits agreed to by the partners.' the assignee is 'in case of a dissolution of the partnership...entitled to receive the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Decided on : Aug-13-1916
Reported in : 36Ind.Cas.787
..... of a joint hindu family is of such a nature that it must modify to a certain extent some of the provisions of the indian contract act in regard to partnership, but this is no ground for contending that such provisions are not to be applied, as far as are consistent with hindu law, ..... be considered to be a partner, and then under section 248 of the indian contract act he became liable on attaining majority for all obligations incurred since he became a partner, and has failed to give public notice of his repudiation of the partnership. i, therefore, think that appellant has been rightly adjudicated insolvent and would ..... proposition.4. where, however, a minor is shown to have been admitted to the benefits of a business, the principle underlying section 247 of the indian contract act may rightly be applied and his share in the property acquired out of the proceeds of the business held, liable for the obligation which arose in ..... the debts of his father incurred in the course of the business carried on by him depends on the provisions of the hindu law and the indian contract act.3. the business was not an ancestral business inherited by the father and the son. was it then a joint family business? the only other ..... he is made liable only for debts incurred since such admission. that again implies that admission to the benefits of the partnership must be by some definite act, such as by the allotment of a share or distribution of profits or something of an analogous character.5. in this case .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Decided on : Aug-28-1916
Reported in : 37Ind.Cas.728
..... . the learned lord seems to suggest that the amount due to the deceased partner is a loan and nothing more. in section 43 of the english partnership act of 1890, this is how the law is stated, 'subject to any agreement between the partners, the amount due from the surviving or continuing partners ..... absolute rule that a minor who is entitled to the assets of his deceased father in the partnership, is entitled to claim as of right, a share in the profits of the concern. there is nothing in the indian contract act to that effect. in a case decided by the house of lords, knox v. gye ..... learned vice chancellor says 'the nature of the trade, the manner of carrying, it on, the capital employed, the state of the account between the partnership and the deceased partner at the time of his death, and the conduct of parties after his death, may materially affect the rights of the parties.' to ..... . the facts of the case are, the plaintiff's father and the defendants in the suit, were partners carrying on business in piece goods. the partnership commenced on 16th june 1901, and it appears that the accounts used to be settled from time to time. the last settlement of accounts in the lifetime ..... contract debt and is subject to the statute of limitations, which runs from the deceased partner's death.' if we look at section 241 of the indian contract act, the same idea seems to underlie the provision in that section. i am, therefore, of opinion that, even assuming that there was no legal settlement .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Decided on : Apr-05-1916
Reported in : 36Ind.Cas.921; (1916)31MLJ575
..... enforceable promise, that is, it becomes a contract. if the consideration is an executed, or past consideration, (to a limited extent past consideration under the indian contract act is sufficient consideration), the contract is an unilateral contract. it is no doubt true that in every contract, even in unilateral contracts, there must be two parties ..... sum of money by a minor to another person cannot result in a loan or debt. this depends upon an examination of the relevant sections of the indian contract act. the starting point for discussion is the decision of the privy council in mohori bibee v. dharmodas ghose (1891) 139 u.s. 21 , which ..... was a moneylending business, he can make loans. see section 253 clause (3) of the contract act. i may also point out that in sinclair v. brougham (1891) 139 u.s. 21, ..... be made liable on the bill, but his banker evidently can honour his cheque. section 22 of the english bills of exchange act which is quite similar to section 26 of the indian act says in terms that the holder can receive payment of the bill. if a minor can pay by a cheque, it ..... would be absurd to hold that he cannot pay cash so as to pass title to it. again a minor partner can apparently transact the business of a partnership and if the partnership .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Decided on : Oct-20-1916
Reported in : 36Ind.Cas.872
..... prosecution of the accused on the charge of a cheating under section 420 of the indian penal code has been misconceived. he and prosecution 1st witness were partners, and there was a debt due by prosecution 5th witness to that partnership. the prosecution case is that the partnership has been dissolved by exhibit a and that the accused had no right under it ..... is doubtful whether the collection of the old debts could be treated as a business of the company. at any rate it is difficult to say that the accused was acting fraudulently or dishonestly in thinking that he had still the right to collect the debts. there was no settlement of accounts and the receiving of the debt from the prosecution ..... witness. section 415 of the indian penal code defines what cheating is. it requires that the person, said to have been cheated, should ..... that in that state of facts the accused obtained from prosecution 5th witness the repayment of the debt due to the partnership giving up a portion and that he has not paid over the money so collected to the partnership or informed prosecution 1st witness about it and thus committed the offence charged. the person said to be cheated is prosecution 5th .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jan-31-1916
Reported in : 33Ind.Cas.724
..... the hamburg branch and it seems as if the bombay branch was really an offshoot of the hamburg branch. the outbreak of war between great britain and austria dissolved the partnership, and on the 24th october 1914 mr. reif was granted a license by the secretary of state under the proclamation of the 9th september 1914.19. meanwhile mr. liebel, an ..... enquring for the benefit of the enemy during the continuance of hostilities.31. as mr. inverarity contended that various ordinances made by the governor-general under section 23 of the indian councils act of 1861. were limited to expire within the period of six months from their promulgation, it seems necessary to point out that under ..... legal proceedings against the debtors of the firm is ultra vires.8. in my opinion the license, as granted to the plaintiff, was within the powers of the governor-general acting under the provisions of the hostile foreigners trading order.9. then it was contended that the defendant was not liable to pay interest, which was recoverable as damages, from the ..... act i of 1915, the provisions of the said ordinances have effect as if they had been enacted by the governor-general in council and remain in force during the continuance .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Feb-20-1916
Reported in : AIR1916Bom193; (1917)ILR41Bom390
..... branch and it seems as if the bombay branch was really an offshoot of the hamburg branch. the outbreak of war between great britain and austria dissolved the partnership, and on the 24th october 1914 mr. reif was granted a license by the secretary of state under the proclamation of the 9th september 1914.23. ..... . ingle, limited v. mannheim insurance company  i k.b. 227. moreover, we submit that on the outbreak of war, the partnership was dissolved, there not being any branch of the partnership left at law to trade in germany. thus we are not a hostile firm even now see griswold v. waddington 16 john 438; esposito ..... enemy during the continuance of hostilities.35. as mr. inverarity contended that various ordinances made by the governor-general under section 23 of the indian councils act of 1861 were limited to expire within the period of six months from their promulgation, it seems necessary to point out that under ..... the debtors of the firm is ultra vires.8. in my opinion the license, as granted to the plaintiff, was within the powers of the governor-general acting under the provisions of the hostile foreigners' trading order.9. then it was contended that the defendant was not liable to pay interest, which was recoverable as ..... act i of 1915 the provisions of the said ordinances have effect as if they had been enacted by the governor general in council .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Decided on : Mar-22-1916
Reported in : 35Ind.Cas.219; (1916)31MLJ138
..... defendant firm had become insolvent. the 1st defendant firm made itself liable for the debts borrowed by the 2nd defendant firm for the purpose of the partnership transactions. in these circumstances, an action was brought to recover the balance due on these acceptances by the plaintiff on behalf of the 2nd defendant ..... a partner for a debt properly incurred on behalf of the partnership simply because a promissory note had been executed for the debt. there is no doubt so far as it appears from the authorities referred to ..... sought to be made liable was not the drawer of the bill, still he was liable because the money was raised for and used in the partnership business. apparently no contention was raised to the contrary apparently because no question could be raised with any chance of success as the liability of ..... there existed the relationship of partners between the two defendants and that the money which was paid on the bill was required and utilised in the partnership business, they held that the partner who did not draw the bill was also liable.4. it is true that the question whether the bills ..... sadasiva aiyar and spencer, jj., the learned judges (at least sadasiva aiyar, j.) based the decision mainly on the provisions of section 91 of the indian evidence act. the promissory note on which action was brought in that case was inadmissible in evidence as it was an unstamped note. the view taken by the .....Tag this Judgment!