Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act Sorted by: recent Year: 1960 Page 1 of about 129 results (0.068 seconds)

Dec 23 1960 (HC)

Gajanand Vs. Sardarmal and anr.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Dec-23-1960

Reported in : AIR1961Raj223

..... now been replaced with some modifications, which are inconsequential in its nature for the purpose of this case, by section 47 of the partnership act. the repealed section 263 of the contract act and section 47 of the indian partnership act give effect to the principle of the english law that after the dissolution of the firm, the authority of each partner continues so far ..... 263 of the contract act), but it may be held that a contrary intention within the meaning of the present ..... section sufficiently appears from the nature of the transaction when it is once ascertained to be a partnership transaction, regard being had to the uniform and well understood ..... commentary of the indian contract act nave stated that the better opinion was that the representatives of a deceased partner were not necessary parties to a suit for tile recovery of that which accrued due to the partnership in the litetime of the deceased. they have further observed that:'the case is not literally covered by section 47 of the indian partnership act (formerly section .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 21 1960 (HC)

The Municipal Corporation of City of Ahmedabad Vs. Harilal Shankarbhai ...

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Dec-21-1960

Reported in : (1961)2GLR495

..... where mr. justice k. t. desai had to consider section 69 of the indian partnership act. section 69 of the indian partnership act is as follows:69 (1) no suit to enforce a right arising from a contract or conferred by this act shall be instituted in any court by or on behalf of any person suing as ..... insolvent partner.9. a question arose as to whether an application under section 8 of the indian arbitration act. 1940 is a proceeding covered by the words other proceeding in section 69(3) of the indian partnership act 1932 in other words whether the cords other proceeding should be read as analogous to a set ..... was a valid delegation of power to the junior assistant to the estate & city improvement officer under the provisions of the bombay provincial municipal corporations act 1949 and that therefore the notice was valid. on the second point the learned judge came to the conclusion that the words or for any ..... judge held that the junior assistant to the estate & city improvement officer was validly delegated the powers to give notice under section 308 of the act. on the second point the learned trial judge came to the conclusion that the words for any other purpose could not be read ejusdem generis ..... the notice failing which as stated above the corporation would proceed to demolish the same under the powers given to the corporation under the said act.3. the plaintiffs case was that the said notice was given by the junior assistant to the estate and city improvement officer of the municipal .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 13 1960 (HC)

P. Chandriah Chetti and anr. Vs. Valchi Madhaviah Chetty and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Dec-13-1960

Reported in : AIR1961Mad478; (1961)2MLJ67

..... . for example, under ordinary circumstances a partner is not-charged with interest on sums drawn out by him or advanced to him.'even under our indian partnership act, as a general rule, interest on capital subscribed by partners is not allowed in taking accounts between, them unless there is an agreement or trade ..... (d) a statutory provision which entitles him to such, interest; such, for instance is the rule in clause (d) of section 13 of the partnership act, which recognises the right of a partner to charge interest on advances made by him to the firm as distinguished from capital subscriptions.13. bearing all ..... money overdrawn by partners and the practice of the courts not to charge a partner with interest in respect of monies overdrawn by him from partnership funds, or on the balance remaining in his hands, we hold that a partner should not be made liable for interest on his overdrawings. ..... provided by statute interest between partners is not allowed unless there is express stipulation, or particular course of dealing between partner as shown by the partnership books or a trade custom to the contrary. but the court allows interest on the restitution of money from the firm which has been expended ..... on 16-1-1941.the plaintiffs as representing the estate of the late voora sriramulu chetti filed the suit for taking of accounts of the partnership, which became dissolved on 31st march 1941. a preliminary decree was passed on 20-3-1945 for taking of accounts and in pursuance thereof a .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 02 1960 (HC)

itty Kurian and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Dec-02-1960

Reported in : AIR1962Ker267

..... carried on by partner no. 1 for over 30 years. the said business was converted into a partnership business some time in 1954 and this partnership has been registered under the indian partnership act and the firm has also been continuing the business of banking.10. it is further stated that in ..... of section 49-a may be struck down.8. the petitioner in o. p. 1417/59 claims to be a partnership concern registered under the provisions of the indian partnership act on 12-3-55 and carrying on business at alleppey in the kerala state. it is also stated that partners nos. ..... national economy.46. the earliest enactment that dealt with the business of banking is the indian companies act 1913 -- act vii of 1913. section 4(1) was to the effect that no company, association or partnership consisting of more than 10 persons shall be formed for the purpose of carrying on ..... public for several years.'50. again, in paragraph 671 the report states:'.....we are of opinion that the existing provisions in the indian companies act governing banking companies, are inadequate.' several important matters haying a vital bearing on questions such as the intial organisation or banks, their efficient ..... that'there should be some legislative control over the operations of banking institutions which at present stand almost exclusively outside the purview of the indian companies act. in fact, the question of legislation for the regulation of banking has engaged the attention of the government of india and of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 01 1960 (SC)

Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay Vs. Dwarkadas Khetan and Co.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Dec-01-1960

Reported in : AIR1961SC680a; [1961]41ITR528(SC); [1961]2SCR821

..... among the three others. though kantilal kasherdeo was a minor, he was admitted as a full partner and not merely to the benefit of the partnership, as required by section 30 of the indian partnership act. to the instrument of partnership, kantilal kasherdeo was also a signatory, though immediately after his signature there was the signature of one kasherdeo rungtathe, the natural guardian of the ..... him as a partner ; but it does not render a minor a competent and full partner. for that purpose, the law of partnership must be considered, apart from the definition in the income-tax act. 10. section 30 of the indian partnership act clearly lays down that a minor cannot become a partner, though with the consent of the adult partners he may be admitted ..... to the benefits of partnership. any document which goes beyond this section cannot be regarded as valid for the purpose of registration. registration can ..... march 27, 1946, created a valid partnership (2) if the answer to question no. 1 is in the affirmative, whether the fact that on january 1, 1946, there was no firm in existence would be fatal to the application for registration of the firm under section 26a of the indian income-tax act or whether the firm could be registered with effect from .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 24 1960 (HC)

Union of India (Uoi), Ministry of Food and Agriculture (Dept. of Food) ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Nov-24-1960

Reported in : AIR1961P& H281

..... parties gave rise to the following issues:1. whether the suit is bad for misjoinder of parties, and causes of action ?2. whether the plaintiff firm is a registered partnership under the indian partnership act and whether shri inder pal dhir is one of the registered partners ?3. whether defendant no. 2 has consented to the variations in the terms of the original contract ..... ?14. relief.10. the trial judge held that the suit was not bad for misjoinder of parties and causes of action, that the plaintiff-firm was duly registered under the indian partnership act and could file the present suit, that defendant no. 2 had neither actively nor impliedly consented to the variations in the terms of the original contract, dated the 3rd july ..... grounds. they inter alia pleaded that the suit was misconceived and was bad for misjoinder of parties and causes of action, that the plaintiff-firm was not registered under the indian partnership act and therefore the suit was not maintainable as framed, and that the ludhiana courts had no jurisdiction to try the same.they admitted the variations made in the terms of ..... by defendant no. 1 and defendant no. 3 without the active or implied consent of defendant no. 2. if one were to apply the provisions of section 133 of the indian contract act, the result of these variations would be that the liability of the surety (defendant no. 2) would be discharged on account of these order to overcome this .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 07 1960 (SC)

Purushottam Umedbhai and Co. Vs. Manilal and Sons

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Oct-07-1960

Reported in : AIR1961SC325; [1961]1SCR982

..... (4) bachubhai manibhai amin and (5) dahyabhai trikambhai. the defendant was the firm of purushottam umedbhai & co. (now the appellant) - a firm registered under the indian partnership act, 1932 - carrying on business at no. 55 canning street, calcutta. in july, 1949, there was a contract between the plaintiff and the defendant under which the defendant ..... business outside india is not a suit in fact by the partners of that firm individually. 11. section 4 of the indian partnership act, 1932, hereinafter referred to as the act, states that : ' 'partnership' is the relation between persons who have agreed to share the profits of business carried on by all or any of them ..... not be a legal entity in the sense of a corporation or a company incorporated under the indian companies act it is still an existing concern where business is done by a number of persons in partnership. when a suit is filed in the name of a firm it is in reality a suit ..... substituting new plaintiffs and as regards them it would be deemed to have been instituted when they were made parties. reference to s. 22(1), indian limitation act, was made in this connection. in the present case, so far as the new plaintiffs were concerned, the suit was barred by time at ..... not those of, r. 17 have any application to the case; (3) having regard to the provisions of s. 45 of the indian contract act a suit by only one partner or one promise is bad to start with. there being within the period of limitation no suit by all the partners .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 27 1960 (SC)

B.K. Wadeyar Vs. Daulatram Rameshwarlal

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-27-1960

Reported in : AIR1961SC311; [1961]1SCR924; [1960]11STC757(SC)

..... das gupta, j. 1. m/s. daulatram rameshwarlal, a firm registered under the indian partnership act (referred to later in this judgment as 'sellers') are registered dealers under s. 11 of the bombay sales tax act. in their return of turnover for the period from april 1, 1954 to march 31, 1955, they claimed exemption from sales ..... useless. 11. our conclusion therefore is that the courts below have rightly interpreted the words 'a person' in s.10(b) of the bombay sales tax act as a 'registered dealer' and the purchasing dealers have rightly been assessed to purchase tax under s.10(b). 12. in the result, both the appeals ..... appeal no. 46 of 1959 the appellants' contention is that on a correct interpretation of the provisions of s. 10(b) of the bombay sales tax act no purchase tax was leviable from them. section 10(b) provides for the levy of a purchase tax on the turnover of purchase of goods specified in ..... about the point of time when the export proper commences. as we have already pointed out when export had been defined in the import & export (control) act, 1947, as 'taking out of india by land, sea, or air', export in the export control order, cannot beheld to have commence till at least ..... placed on behalf of the sales tax officer is that export control order, 1954, which was passed in the exercise of powers conferred by import & export control act, 1947, contained a provision in its clause 5(2) in these words :- 'it shall be deemed to be a condition of that licence ............. that the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 11 1960 (HC)

J.B. Mangaram and Co. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Aug-11-1960

Reported in : AIR1961MP96; [1960(1)FLR518]; (1961)ILLJ89MP

..... article 226 of the constitution of india is by a partner of a firm registered under the indian partnership act which is engaged in the business of manufacture of biscuits and confectionary. 2. the petitioner's manufactory at gwalior has been licensed under the factories act as a factory employing not more than five-hundred workers on any one day during the year ..... there are other undertakings to which it might have been applied. 7. for the foregoing reasons, we are of the view that the limitation on the applicability of the act to undertakings of biscuit and confectionery industry employing more than hundred workers does not bring about an unreasonable and arbitrary classification. consequently the notification issued by the opponent state on ..... discretion is not uncontrolled. the statute itself indicates with sufficient clarity the policy or principle for the guidance of the government in the matter of exercise of the discretion. the act, as is apparent from its preamble, is meant for regulating the relations of employers and employees and for the settlement of industrial disputes. it is not a measure dealing ..... there was thus an unreasonable and arbitrary classification between undertakings employing less than hundred workers and those employing more than hundred workers for the purposes of the applicability of the act. 4. in our judgment, the notification in question is not vulnerable to the objection put forward by the learned counsel for the petitioner. the principles by which the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 08 1960 (HC)

Motilal and Another Vs. Income-tax Officer, District Ii (iii) Kanpur.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Aug-08-1960

Reported in : [1962]44ITR454(All)

..... a liability on the firm and the partners of the firm at the relevant time would be liable to meet that liability under the provisions of the indian partnership act. we see no reason to assume that they will not be liable for the tax payable by the firm though they would be liable for the ..... business debts of their partnership.there may again be a case where a firm has to be assessed to tax and proceedings are started for the purpose but before they terminate ..... is an application under article 226 of the constitution by two persons who were partners of a firm which carried on business in the name and style of indian distillery at anwarganj, kanpur, praying for the issue of a writ of certiorari quashing the notices of demand dated october 24, 1959, and a writ of ..... directly traceable to the assessment made on the unregistered firm and the contention that the notice of demand was not relevant to an assessment made under the act but was related to an order of this court is in our opinion quite untenable. learned counsel has invited our attention to the provisions of sections ..... court found that in view of the fact that the petitioners had not been served with any notice of demand under section 29 of the income-tax act no recovery proceedings were maintainable against them. that petition was, therefore, allowed.after the decision of this court it appears that the income-tax officer .....

Tag this Judgment!

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