Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act Year: 1960 Page 3 of about 129 results (0.069 seconds)

May 09 1960 (HC)

Moti Chandra and ors. Vs. Income-tax Officer

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : May-09-1960

Reported in : AIR1962All291

..... else and can be subjected to tax as such. a firm is not a juristic entity and except in the income-tax act it is not considered as a person. under the indian partnership act when one speaks of a firm all the partners are meant to be spoken of. the very definition of a firm under ..... the indian partnership act shows this. for purposes of income tax, however, a firm is considered to be a unit. all the partners of a firm are ..... that as an agreement of partnership between more than twenty persons was not legally permissible, those 29 persons constituted not a firm but an association of persons. ..... it is stated in the petition that this firm also was dissolved on the 1st march 1956. the firm constituted under the earlier instrument of partnership was registered under the income-tax act for the assessment year 1948-49, and the registration was renewed for the years 1949-50, 1950-51, 1951-52 and 1952-53. ..... genuine agreement of partnership between nine persons. on the finding that 29 persons were associated together in earning the profit of the business he held that the income was in fact of an association of persons consisting of those 29 individuals.the income tax officer referred to section 4 of the indian companies act 1913 and held .....

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!

May 05 1960 (HC)

Chiman Ram Bhatar and ors. Vs. Ganga Saha and anr.

Court : Orissa

Decided on : May-05-1960

Reported in : AIR1961Ori94

..... was right in dismissing the suit on the ground of non-maintainability under section 69 of the indian partnership act. it appears that no point was taken by the defendants under section 69 of the indian partnership act in their written statement. it appears that the defendants sought to raise the point under section ..... the institution of the suit, the suit was not maintainable by reason of section 69 of the indian partnership act. the learned lower appellate court also found that assuming that it was not a partnership but a joint family firm, the two brothers of plaintiff no. 2 not having been joined as ..... this case, however, has no application in the facts and circumstances of the present case, where registration as required under section 69 of the partnership act merely refers to the enforcibility of the right, which the plaintiff has already got on the cause of action to recover the amount of loan ..... prejudiced by reason of the defendants taking the point of registration under section 69 of the partnership act at such a late stage. if the defendants had taken this plea in the written statement, then it was open to the plaintiffs to ..... the written statement. the learned lower appellate court who decided this case in may 1958 however accepted the defence plea under section 69 of the partnership act and dismissed the suit as aforesaid. 4. mr. l. k. das gupta, learned counsel for the plaintiffs, contended that the plaintiffs are .....

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!

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!

Mar 02 1960 (HC)

Buddulal Goerlal Mahajan Vs. Shrikisan Chandmal

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Mar-02-1960

Reported in : AIR1961MP57

..... of jointness based on the evidence of shrikishan. thus, the defendant really gets nowhere to the stage of getting the benefit of section 69 of the indian partnership act. (iii) applicability of section 30 of the indian contract act.13. from the earliest stage of the dispute, the defendant has been thinking of this, as is apparent from his telegram of the 1st april, already ..... courts should take notice on their own. so far, the proposition cannot be seriously questioned; but before we reach the position calling for the application of section 60 of the indian partnership act, the defendant has to dislodge the plaintiffs from the position they have taken as hindu joint family, which can be only on the basis of a finding of fact. 12 ..... the defendant, it is argued here that the plaintiffs will have to prove either that they constitute a joint family, or show that they are a firm registered under the indian partnership act and produce a copy of the certificate and the entry in the books of the registrar of firms. this, it is contended, need not be expressly pleaded, as section 69 ..... shares of the hukumchand mills. the points for decision generally are (i) whether the plaintiffs are really a hindu joint family concern, or a joint venture amounting to partnership attracting section 69 of the indian partnership act; (ii) whether the indore court or the court at dhar has got territorial jurisdiction; (iii) whether these forward contracts are of the nature of wagering contracts under .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 18 1960 (HC)

Fazl Bhai Dhala and Co. Vs. Collector of Sales Tax

Court : Orissa

Decided on : Jul-18-1960

Reported in : [1961]12STC216(Orissa)

..... was contended before the sales tax authorities that, after the expiry of that period, the partnership between the two became a partnership-at-will by virtue of section 17(b) of the indian partnership act and it was dissolved by giving a notice as required by section 23(1) of that act on 18th january, 1950, prior to the quarters in question. the sales tax authorities ..... the sales tax authorities to take a different view especially in view of the conduct of the petitioner in not reporting about the dissolution of the partnership under section 18(a) of the orissa sales tax act and in his continuing to file returns and maintaining accounts in the name of the firm. i must therefore hold that there was no error ..... no. (6) is therefore answered as follows:on the findings of fact of the collector of commercial taxes it must be held that the partnership firm continued to exist for the purpose of the orissa sales tax act.the other questions do not arise for decision and need not be answered. the reference is disposed of accordingly. there will be no order ..... in the alternative the deductions claimed in the returns may be exempted from taxation under article 286(2) of the constitution ?(5) whether a partnership firm still continues to function for the purposes of the sales tax act even though it is dissolved by agreement under a registered deed of dissolution and notice of dissolution is given to the appropriate authorities, and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 28 1960 (HC)

Narsingh Das Vs. Bhairon Dan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Jul-28-1960

Reported in : AIR1961Raj81

..... proceeding against the insolvent without the leave of the insolvency may also be pointed out in this connection that before the indian partnership act, 1932, came into force, if the insolvent carried on business in partnership with other persons, the partnership was not dissolved by his insolvency and the other partners in that event became entitled to institute a suit for dissolution of ..... date the order of adjudication is made, by virtue of section 34 of the partnership act. again, except where there is a contract to the contrary, such firm is also dissolved when one of the partners thereof is adjudicated an insolvent (see section 42 of the ..... the partnership and for rendition of accounts outside the insolvency court.but ever since the partnership act came into force, where a partner in a firm has been adjudged an insolvent, he ceases to be a partner in the firm on the ..... partnership act). the position, therefore, is that on the adjudication of a partner as insolvent, his share in the partnership business along with his separate property vests in the insolvency court.once this vesting takes place, the provisions of section 17 of .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 10 1960 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi, Ajmer, Rajasthan and Madhya Bharat ...

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : May-10-1960

Reported in : [1961]41ITR245(All)

..... working in the capacity of a servant or was carrying on its business.' it was held by this court that a partnership firm under the indian partnership act is constituted for the purpose of carrying on a business only and is not constituted for the purpose of entering into service ..... the supreme court laid down the principle in the following words :'when a partnership firm comes into existence, it can be predicated of it that it carries on a business, because partnership according to section 4 of the indian partnership act is the relation between persons who have agreed to share the profits of a ..... business carried on by all or any of them acting for all.'after laying down this principle their lordships of ..... . this circumstance itself showed that the work of managing agents was being carried on by the partnership firm as a business and the appointment as ..... as deductible when computing the income of the assessee under the head, 'profits and gains of business' under section 10 of the income-tax act. the claim was disallowed by the income-tax officer and the appellate assistant commissioner and, when the appeal came before the income-tax appellate tribunal .....

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!

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