Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act Sorted by: old Year: 1949 Page 1 of about 52 results (0.166 seconds)

Mar 04 1949 (PC)

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

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-04-1949

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

Decided on : Mar-30-1949

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

Decided on : Jul-27-1949

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

Decided on : Aug-12-1949

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

Decided on : Sep-27-1949

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 act.in 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!

May 12 1949 (PC)

Mohan Lal Huja and ors. Vs. Chawla Bank, Ltd.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : May-12-1949

Reported in : AIR1949All778

..... ' shall not include a railway company incorporated by act of parliament or by an indian law, nor a company registered under the indian companies act, 1866 (x [10] of 1866), or under any act appealed thereby, or under the indian companies act, 1882 (vi [6] of 1882), or under this act, but save as aforesaid shall include any partnership, association or company consisting of more than seven ..... foreign company, is covered by the definition.22. after the separation of burma and aden from british india a new section 2a was inserted in the indian companies act by the government of india (adaptation of indian laws) order 1937, making provisions about the companies registered in burma and aden before the separation. the section is in these terms:notwithstanding anything in ..... members.the bank is not a company incorporated or registered in the manner referred to in the said section. true the bank was registered in british india, under the indian companies act, in its ..... judge of this court, in exercise of the original company jurisdiction of the court, under rule 153, companies act (vii [7] of 1913).2. the chawla bank, ltd., was incorporated in british india as a joint stock company, under the indian companies act, in the year 1932, with its registered office at bannu in the north-west frontier province. at the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 28 1949 (PC)

Durga Prosad Chamaria Vs. Sewakishendas

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jul-28-1949

Reported in : (1950)52BOMLR171

..... themselves complicated and the conception upon which is founded his interpretation of the respective legal rights of the parties in the assets of the partnership or partnerships is a subtle one. but there is neither indefiniteness nor ambiguity in his holding as to the interests of the parties in the ..... that (a) the arbitrator had admitted as evidence the family settlement and the partnership arrangement of 1916, neither of which, though each related (it was said) to immoveable property, had bean registered as required by the indian registration act, and (b) the arbitrator ought to have held that anardeyi's suit ..... of proof resorted to that made it strictly proper for the arbitrator to take notice of the fact that the family settlement or the partnership arrangement was made. it is impossible to say. but unless the appellants could demonstrate affirmatively that the law was departed from by the ..... , radhakissen, motilal and surji were parties, a, decree was made by consent that terms of settlement defining the shares in the partnership business according to the partnership agreement of 1916 should be carried into effect.7. suit no. 1840 of 1930 was instituted originally by the official receiver as ..... appear on the face of the award in the reference to the family settlement or the partnership arrangement of 1916. firstly, because the agreed terms of reference were such that an arbitrator acting under them was dispensed from observing legal rules of evidence, as he was dispensed from many .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 28 1949 (PC)

Durga Prosad Chamria and Another Vs. Sewkishendas Bhattar and Others

Court : Privy Council

Decided on : Jul-28-1949

Reported in : AIR1949PC334

..... of the respective legal rights of the parties in the assets of the respective legal rights of the parties in the assets of the partnership or partnerships is a subtle one. but there is neither indefinite ness nor ambiguity in his holding as to the interests of the parties in ..... that (a) the arbitrator had admitted as evidence the family settlement and the partnership arrangement of 1916, neither of which, though each related (it was said) to immovable property, had been registered as required by the indian registration act, and (b) the arbitrator ought to have held that anardeyi's suit was ..... of proof resorted to that made it strictly proper for the arbitrator to take notice of the fact that the family settlement or the partnership arrangement was made. it is impossible to lay. but unless the appellants could demonstrate affirmatively that the law was departed from by the ..... durga prosad, radhakissen, motilal and surji were parties, a decree was made by consent that terms of settlement defining the shares in the partnership business according to the partnership agreement of 1916 should be carried into effect. [7] suit 1840 of 1930 was instituted originally by the official receiver as receiver ..... does appear on the face of the award in the reference to the family settlement or the partnership arrangement of 1916. firstly, because the agreed terms of reference were such that an arbitrator acting under them was dispensed from observing legal rules of evidence, as be was dispensed from many .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 19 1949 (PC)

Jesingbhai Ujamshi Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Sep-19-1949

Reported in : AIR1950Bom198; (1950)52BOMLR94; [1950]18ITR23(Bom)

..... this business was commenced in 1918 and the shares of the three partners are equal.2. the question that arose for the determination of the tribunal was whether these two partnerships constitute two different firms or whether the three partners carry on the same firm and the same business at ahmedabad and bhavnagar. the tribunal came to the conclusion that in ..... in the following terms:'whether in law common partners can constitute two separate firms in respect of different businesses carried on by these partners for the purpose of the indian income-tax act.'having reformulated that question we answer the question in the affirmative. with regard to the second question, we agree with the tribunal that it is a question of fact ..... the lahore high court in the ease of krishna ginning and pressing factory v. commissioner of income-tax, punjab 5 i. t. c. 334 . in that case, under the same partnership deed, two separate businesses were to be carried on, and the question that arose for determination was whether two separate firms came into existence under the same ..... partnership deed or only one firm, and, on the construction of the partnership deed, the high court at lahore came to the conclusion that there was only one firm and not two firms. the very fact that .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 18 1949 (PC)

Kikabhoy Chandabhoy Vs. the Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Mar-18-1949

Reported in : (1949)51BOMLR677

..... a discontinuance or a succession within the meaning of either of these two sub-sections on april 1, 1942, on the death of kikabhoy or a new partnership coming into existence on that date. the income-tax officer who made the assessment rejected the contention of the assesses and refused to grant any relief either under ..... regard to super-tax. the tribunal rejected the contention of the assesses, and thereupon & reference has been made to us under section 66(1,) of the indian income-tax act; and two questions have been framed by the tribunal for our consideration.4. now the first contention of sir jamshedji is that in view of the decision ..... under an instrument dated october 13, 1938. kikabhoy died on march 22, 1942. by an instrument of partnership dated march 29, 1942, a new partnership was brought into existence and that partnership was to commence business from april 1, 1942. that partnership consisted of the widow of kikabhoy, his daughter and an outsider by the name of abbasbhai mohamedali. ..... m.c. chagla, c.j.1. the facts leading up to this reference may be briefly stated. the assesses are a registered partnership firm carrying on business in the name of kikabhoy chandabhoy. kikabhoy chandabhoy himself was the sole proprietor of this firm and then there were ..... this partnership was dissolved on october 30; 1942.2. in the assessment of this firm, for the year 1942-43 a claim was made that the .....

Tag this Judgment!


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