Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act Sorted by: old Year: 1919 Page 1 of about 19 results (0.061 seconds)

Dec 12 1919 (PC)

In Re: Indian Arbitration Act; in Re: Babaldas Khemchand

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Dec-12-1919

Reported in : (1920)22BOMLR842; 57Ind.Cas.997

..... of november 1917.2. this is a petition by the 1st defendant partner for stay of the suit under section 19 of the indian arbitration act, 1899, on the ground that the partnership agreement included a submission to arbitration.3. the submission is in clause 12 of the agreement which is as follows:when any ..... filed is a suit by the plaintiff who says he went out of the partnership in november 1917 and claims an account. that is the very subject-matter of the submission.10. then, it is said that the court should ..... arbitrate.9. it is next suggested that the dispute does not fall within the scope of the submission as the defendant petitioner has contended that the partnership has not been dissolved. but the date adopted for the dissolution is a matter which is ancillary to the taking of the account. the suit as ..... subject matter could be, as here, the subject of a suit in a presidency town. the intention of the legislature was evidently to apply the indian arbitration act to all such cases and to leave other cases subject to the civil procedure code. although the court is only able to enforce the submission by appointing arbitrators ..... . for the respondent plaintiff mr. kanga contends that the submission providing for a reference to three arbitrators is outside the scope of the indian arbitration act and that the court has no jurisdiction to stay the suit under section 19.5. it has recently been decided that the court cannot .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 12 1919 (PC)

In Re: Indian Arbitration Act

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Dec-12-1919

Reported in : (1921)ILR45Bom1

..... of november 1917.2. this is a petition by the 1st defendant partner for stay of the suit under section 19 of the indian arbitration act, 1899, on the ground that the partnership-agreement included a submission, to arbitration.3. the submission is in clause 12 of the agreement, which is as follows:when any ..... filed is a. suit by the plaintiff who says he went out of the partnership in november 1917 and claims an account. that is the very subject-matter of the submission.10. then, it is said that the court should not ..... to arbitrate.9. it is next suggested that the dispute does not fall within the scope of the submission as the defendant petitioner has contended that the partnership has not been dissolved. but the date adopted for the dissolution is, a matter which is ancillary to the taking of the account. the suit as ..... subject matter could be, as here, the subject of a suit in a presidency town. the intention of the legislature was evidently to apply the indian arbitration act to all such cases and to leave other cases subject to the civil procedure code. although the court is only able to enforce the submission by appointing arbitrators ..... for the respondent-plaintiff mr. kanga contends that the submission providing for a reference to three arbitrators is outside the scope of the indian arbitration act and that the court has no jurisdiction to stay the suit under section 19.5. it has recently been decided that the court cannot .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 18 1919 (PC)

K.A.C.C.T. Chidambaram Chetti and ors. Vs. V.R.K.R. Karuthan Chetti an ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Dec-18-1919

Reported in : 58Ind.Cas.80; (1920)39MLJ511

..... in a partnership is entitled ' only to receive the share of the profits to which the assigning partner would otherwise be entitled and the ..... there were learned arguments citing english decisions (many of them based on it (2) of section 31 of the english partnership act as i think that the law governing partnership transactions is laid down with sufficient clearness in the indian contract act itself. the assignee of a share (whether completed or only by way of mortgage) from one of two partners not ..... of the 2nd clause of section 31 of the partnership act and seem to have ignored the provisions of section 38 of the english partnership act corresponding to section 263 of the indian contract act. however i express my opinion on the english act with very great diffidence as my knowledge of the history of partnership legislation in england is almost negligible. if as i ..... directly liable for any proportion of the partnership liabilities, such determinations would be necessary in the adjustment between them and the 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 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 11 1919 (PC)

Purusottum Das NaraIn Das Vs. Louis Dreyfus and Co.

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Apr-11-1919

Reported in : 56Ind.Cas.325

..... in england, and the law that has been incorporated into this country, recognises these persons as joint proprietors of a business, but does not recognise a partnership as being an entity at all; it is a mere guise or cloak or name by which the individual persons, joint owners, are concealed or pointed out. ..... inconvenience and trouble, giving much opportunity for fraud and collusion, if i give my assent to the argument which has been put before me. under the indian arbitration act the award is not a decree, but it is to be enforced as though it were a decree and a decree of this court. i certainly held ..... fact that the procedure for suing a firm in the firm's name was only introduced into this country in it 1908, i must not read the indian arbitration act of 1899 together with the new provisions in 190s. for the present purpose 1 do not agree. it is quite true, and i am glad ..... there is no such thing as a partnership; but the law now does allow for persons who own businesses in co-partnership being sued for convenience by a designation which is the designation commercially employed, and the machinery for doing that has ..... to hear that it is known, that in strictness of law there is no such thing as a firm or partnership. partnership is a relationship 'between persons and the law .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 19 1919 (PC)

Kadiri Kanakkapillantapath Abdur Raheman Kutti Haji, managing Partner ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Feb-19-1919

Reported in : (1919)37MLJ316

..... defendant and the 2nd defendant's brother, who was his muktear, notified to one of the persons with whom they had dealings that they were trading in partnership under the firm name of kochipalli hussain kunhi and kuttikolone mamed kunhi, that is, the name of the 1st and 2nd defendants. these two persons belong ..... named mammi kutti. under exhibit ll he bought out this partner in 1873 and thereafter traded with his own brother assam kunhi. bachi kutti joined this partnership. kunhi kuttiyali haji and assam kunhi were his cousins, that is to say, his mother's sister's sons. at that time bachikutii was not ..... karnavanship and held the position till his death in 1908 when he was succeeded by the 1st defendant. kunyi kuttiali haji carried on his business in partnership at first with a stranger and then he and his younger-brother hussain kunyi bought up that partner's share and hussain kunyi became a partner ..... on by a hindu widow, who had succeeded to it as the heiress of her deceased husband. to the same effect are the rulings of this court: see south indian export company v. subbier : air1916mad449 , and malaiperumal chettiar v. arunachala chettiar (1917) 6 l.w. 417. see also joykisto cowar v. nittianund nundy i.l. ..... upon the members of a hindu undivided family; and we think that such a family can, by its manager or its adult members acting as into managers, enter co-partnership with a stranger. in carrying on such a trade, infant members of the undivided family will be bound by all .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 26 1919 (PC)

Amalur Venkayya Naidu Vs. Vissa Lakshminarasayya and anr.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-26-1919

Reported in : 58Ind.Cas.969

..... at the close of 1915, when the 1st defendant finally refused to share the profits with the plaintiff. he does not allege any act of expulsion from the partnership in his plaint, and in his evidence he admitted that he did not issue any notice for the payment of his share in the ..... seeing that the continuance of the relationship of partners depended on the animus of the parties to continue as partners. i hold, therefore, that the partnership was dissolved at least from the date of the suit of 1910, the plaint and the written statement being tantamount to notice of dissolution served by ..... the plaintiff sending, on 13th september 1897, a lawyer's notice, exhibit iii, threatening a suit to compel the defendant to get a-deed of partnership executed and then doing nothing more till he sued in february 1910 to establish his right to the mine. the plaintiff also admitted before the registrar ..... in paragraph 8 of the written statement it is stated: 'as the plaintiff failed to carry out the arrangement effected on 4th february 1907, as the partnership kararnama was not executed as intended, the plaintiff has lost his 2 annas share also. he also set up a subsequent arrangement which, if true, ..... and practically evade limitation altogether. this is certainly inconsistent with the scheme of the limitation act which provides a general residuary article for all suits not covered by a specific article that is to say, the indian legislature has laid down a limit of time for all suits. there is no specific .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 29 1919 (PC)

Annamalai Chetti and anr. Vs. Annamalai Chetti

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-29-1919

Reported in : 52Ind.Cas.456

..... .w.n. 486 : 8 m.l.t. 231 plaintiffs were allowed to sue for their share of assets received by a co-partner after the dissolution of a partnership, but this was not without the defendants being at liberty to re open the whole accounts of the business. sadhu narayana aiyangar v. ramaswami aiyangar 3 ind cas. ..... 25 b.p 606 : 3 bom. l.r. 227 the reason being that the advance made by one partner would be only one item in the partnership account; nor can one firm sue another when the sole partners of the first firm are partners along with others in the second firm and the claim is ..... have a common partner or partners, or on behalf of a firm to recover a debt due by one of the partners of that firm. see lindley on partnership (8th edition), page 323. in india, order xxx, rule 9, of the civil procedure code recognises the maintainability of suits between firms and one or more partners of ..... , seven in number and the plaintiff in the present suit was declared to be the owner of one share while the suit was pending and before the partnership was dissolved, a sum of rs. 35,239 and odd was collected by one arunachalla chetty, who was the agent of the mandalay firm, and this ..... a guardian of his property was appointed by the district court of madura in civil miscellaneous petition no. 411 of 1900, which had the effect under the indian majority act of extending the attainment of his majority till he completed his 21st year.8. the subordinate judge has accepted october 6th, 1891, which was also the date .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 16 1919 (PC)

Gaffur Rowther and anr. Vs. Hamida Beevi Ammal and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-16-1919

Reported in : (1919)36MLJ456

..... plaintiff is entitled to mesne profits of the immoveable property, and (2) whether she is entitled to interest upon her share of the assets of the partnership carried on by her father. on the first question it was pointed out to us that in the court below there was no allegation that mesne profits ..... of equity, justice and good conscience which are specially referred to in the civil courts act, the courts in india are at liberty to award interest in cases not coming within the purview of the interest act. the indian courts have followed this rule for a long time. the courts in this country therefore ..... london chatham and dover railway co. v. south eastern railway co. l.r. (1893) ac. 429 for the proposition that in matters outside the interest act no interest is payable. the noble lords who took part in the discussion, especially lord herschell, point out that there has been a course of decisions in ..... in hamiba bihi v. lubaida bibi i.l.r. (1916) a. 581 which was a case of dower, the judicial committee after saying that the interest act was not applicable allowed interest as damages. see also ahmed musaji saleji v. kashim ebrahm saleji i.l.r. (1915) c. 914 another decision of the ..... no bearing on the matter we have to decide. on the other hand the cases to which the learned advocate-general drew our attention establish that the act was not intended to affect payments of interest or compensation in matters not coming strictly within the letter of the law. in miller v. barlow (1871 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 16 1919 (PC)

P.S.K. Haji Sena Muhammad Abdul Gaffur Rowthar and anr. Vs. Hamida Bee ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-16-1919

Reported in : 52Ind.Cas.505

..... plaintiff is entitled to mesne profits of the immoveable property and (2) whether she; is entitled to interest upon her share of the assets of the partnership carried on by her father. on the first question it was pointed out to us that in the court below there was no allegation that mesne profits ..... this country is ordinarily that, and no special reason has been shown why it should be raised to 9 per cent. the analogy of the trusts act, section 23, to which the learned advocate-general referred us, has no bearing on the present question and we are not prepared to allow compound interest ..... principles of equity, justice and good conscience, which are specially referred to in the civil courts act, the courts in india are at liberty to award interest in cases not coming within the purview of the interest act. the indian courts have followed this rule for a long time. the courts in this country, therefore, ..... no bearing on the matter we have to decide. on the other hand, the cases to which the learned advocate-general drew our attention establish that the act was not intended to affect payments of interest or compensation in matters not coming strictly within the letter of the law. in miller v. barlow (1872) ..... . 3 and 4 william iv, chapter 42, was enacted-with a view to meet such a demand. it is clear from the language of the act that the provisions dealt with only a particular class of cases, and enabled the courts to give interest at the current rate under certain conditions. the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 31 1919 (PC)

Krishnadhan Banerji Vs. Sanyasi Charan Mandal

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Jan-31-1919

Reported in : 51Ind.Cas.597

..... prokasa modeliar 26 c. 349; 3 c.w.n. 190; 13 ind. dec. (n.s.) 826, viz. that a hindu infant can only become a member of the partnership by a consentient act on the part of himself and partners,' and similar observations in the judgments of some of the learned judges in the case of official assignee of madras v. falaniapfa ..... the omission to frame a specific issue on the point.17. the next contention is, that a minor cannot be said to be 'admitted to the benefits of partnership' unless there is some consentient act on his part, in other words, that he must enter into an agreement, although such an agreement is invalid according to law. we were referred to certain ..... it by retaining such properties, and that having done so, he is liable for the debts of the firm. section 217 of the contract act provides that a minor may be admitted to the benefits of a partnership, and though he cannot be made personally liable for any obligation of the firm, the share of such minor in the property of the ..... the karta or guardian had no power, there is no liability of the minor even to the extent of his share of the partnership properties under section 247, nor is he personally liable under section 248 of the contract act. but the liability of a minor under section 247 does not depend upon the powers of the karta or guardian, but depends .....

Tag this Judgment!


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