Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act Sorted by: old Year: 1948 Page 1 of about 32 results (0.059 seconds)

Jan 28 1948 (PC)

In Re: Swaranath Bhatia

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-28-1948

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

Decided on : Feb-26-1948

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

Decided on : Feb-26-1948

..... 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!

Apr 22 1948 (PC)

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

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Apr-22-1948

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 plaint.in 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

Decided on : Dec-17-1948

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!

Aug 12 1948 (PC)

R.A. Coodzer and Company Vs. the Commissioner of Excess Profits Tax

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Aug-12-1948

Reported in : (1948)2MLJ442

..... made by a firm to any partner of the firm '--no distinct provision has yet been made about hindu joint family trading firms to which the partnership act does not apply and in my judgment, the principles under lying the decisions to which i have referred are still applicable to them.9. in this ..... in correct terms though they are now more or less of an academic interest only in so far as partnerships governed by the partnership act are concerned inasmuch as a provision has been inserted in the present act disallowing ' any allowance in respect of any payment by way of interest, salary, commission, or remuneration ..... whether interest paid to a partner in respect of a loan advanced by him to the partnership was a legitimate item of business expenditure within the meaning of section 10(2)(iii) of the indian income-tax act. it was held that where a partner as partner genuinely lends money, beyond the initial ..... , statutes--both the cases upon which the high court relied and the flood of other decisions which has been let loose in this board. the indian act is not in pari maleria; it is less elaborate in many ways, subject to fewer refinements, and in arrangement and language, it differs greatly ..... capital, to the partnership at an agreed reasonable rate of interest and the money is used for capital expenditure, the interest paid by the partnership to him in the year .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 12 1948 (PC)

R. A. Goodsir and Co., Madras Vs. Commissioner of Excess Profits Tax, ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Aug-12-1948

Reported in : [1948]16ITR367(Mad)

..... by a firm to any partner of the firm.... no distinct provision has yet been made about hindu joint family trading firms to which the partnership act does not apply and in my judgment, the principles underlying the decisions to which i have referred are still applicable to them.'in this case, ..... correct terms though they are now more or less of an academic interest only in so far as partnerships governed by the partnership act are concerned inasmuch as a provision has been inserted in the present act disallowing any allowance in respect of any payment by way of interest, salary, commission or remuneration ..... whether interest paid to a partner in respect of a loan advanced by him to the partnership was a legitimate item of business expenditure within the meaning of section 10 (2) (iii) of the indian income-tax act. it was held that where a partner as partner genuinely lends money, beyond the initial ..... these general observations were made in the absence of any provision in the statute prohibiting such a deduction being made. in fact, even under the indian act, rent for the business premises paid to a partner would be an allowable deduction. jones v. wright dealt with the charges of a solicitor, ..... capital, to the partnership at an agreed reasonable rate of interest and the money is used for capital expenditure, the interest paid by the partnership to him in the year of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 12 1948 (PC)

P.A. Raju Chettiar and Brothers, Jewellers Vs. the Commissioner of Inc ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Aug-12-1948

Reported in : (1948)2MLJ430

..... that in the peculiar circumstances of the case the only manner in which the interests of the minor could be served was by the guardian acting in the partnership deed as the partner while as a matter of fact she was not the partner and a share of eight annas being shown as belonging ..... the profits from being distributed to the partners otherwise than in accordance with the shares of the partners as shown in the instrument of partnership registered under the act and to prevent any partner returning his income below its real amount. we think that this is a hard case in view of the ..... them was necessary in the interests of revenue. in such circumstances option is given to the income-tax officer either to act according to the distributive shares recorded in the deed of partnership which has been registered or to make the assessment upon persons who are found upon enquiry to have actually received those ..... decision is--whether the firm purported to have been brought into existence by the deed of partnership, dated 14th august, 1941, can in law be registered under section 26-a of the indian income-tax act.the proved facts are these. raju chettiar and ramaswami chettiar who were brothers constituted a joint hindu family ..... father. it is argued in this connection that there is nothing in section 26-a of the income-tax act to militate against the right of the guardian either to enter into a partnership on behalf of the minors in his or her own name, or to utilise the minors' moneys towards capital .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 12 1948 (PC)

P. A. Raju Chettiar and Brothers Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Madra ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Aug-12-1948

Reported in : [1949]17ITR51(Mad)

..... that in the peculiar circumstances of the case the only manner in which the interest of the minor could be served was by the guardian acting in the partnership deed as the partners while as the matter of fact she was not the partners, and the share of eight annas being shows as ..... the profits from being distributed to the partners otherwise than in accordance with the shares of the partners as shown in the instrument of partnership registered under the act and to prevent any partners returning his income below its real amount. we think that this is a regard case in view of ..... was necessary in the interest of revenue. in such circumstances option is given to the income-tax officer either to act according to the distributive shares recorded in the deed of partnership which has been registered or to make the assessment upon persons who are found upon enquiry to have actually received those ..... minors father. it is argued in this connection that there is nothing in section 26a of the income-tax act to militate against right of the guardian either to enter into a partnership on behalf of the minors in his or her own name, or to utilise the minors moneys towards capital ..... decision is :-'whether the firm purported to have been brought into existence by the deed of partnership dated august 14, 1941, can in law be register dander section 26a of the indian income-tax act ?'the proved facts are these. raja chettiar and ramaswamy chettiar who were brother constituted a joint hindu family and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 10 1948 (PC)

Chennuru Sitharamamurthi Chetty and ors. Vs. Chennuru Guruswami Chetti ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Dec-10-1948

Reported in : (1949)1MLJ400

..... legal representative for the profit arising from a's share of the capital.14. section 258 of the indian contract act, which has since been repealed, and which has been re-enacted as part of section 16 of the partnership act of 1932, had the following illustration:a, b, and c are partners in trade. c, ..... without the knowledge of a and b obtains for his own sole benefit a lease of the house in which the partnership business is carried on. a and b are ..... -general strenuously relied upon the fact that neither the lease nor the licence could be sold as an asset of the partnership, as such a sale is not permitted by the madras salt act. that may be so. but this circum-stance does not present to us any insuperable difficulty in moulding the decree ..... partners, if the latter are prompt to assert their rights.13. the law is substantially the same in india. it is contained in two sections of the indian trusts act, namely, sections 88 and section go. they run thus:section 88 : where a trustee, executor, partner, agent, director of a company, legal adviser, ..... for renewal was made, and the sanction of the collector obtained, well before the termination of the partnership.30. the learned advocate-general tried to escape from the terms of section 88 of the trusts act by arguing that defendants 1 to 7 did not avail themselves of their position as partners but that .....

Tag this Judgment!


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