Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act Year: 1969 Page 1 of about 128 results (0.076 seconds)

Sep 16 1969 (HC)

Addepally Nageswara Rao and Brothers Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Sep-16-1969

Reported in : [1971]79ITR306(AP)

..... his dissent to be partner. (8) ...... (9) for the conduct of the affairs of the firm (and) for defining the rights and liabilities of the partnership as well as for dissolution, the current provisions of the indian partnership act, 1932, will apply. 1. (signed) addepalli nageswararao.2. (signed) addepalli nageswararao.3. (signed) addepalli kasiviswanadham.4. (signed) addepalli mareswararao.'12. on a consideration of clauses ..... calcutta high court in hoosen kasam dadav. commissioner of income-tax was preferable to the view taken by themadras high court and held at page 533 :' section 30 of the indian partnership act clearly lays down that aminor cannot become a partner, though with the consent of the adult partners he may be admitted to the benefits of ..... to understand the relationship between the major partners and a minor who is admitted to the benefits of the partnership under section 30 of the indian partnership act. although a minor cannot enter into an agreement of partnership so as to acquire the rights of the partnership and be subject to the obligations of a partuer still he can draw the benefits from such a firm ..... , satisfied that the guardian can enter into a contract on behalf of the minor.31. in this connection, it is relevant to note the language of section 4 of the indian partnership act. it says that, ' partnership ' is the relation between persons who have agreed to share the profits of a business carried on by all or any of them .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 20 1969 (HC)

Ram NaraIn and Brothers Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Feb-20-1969

Reported in : [1969]73ITR423(All)

..... of conveyance as contemplated in section 22 of the indian partnership act, quoted above, becomes imperative. in point of fact, conversion of firm's property into personal property of the partners involves a declaration that the interest of the firm in the ..... or immovable. the contention that a firm cannot own property, even for the purpose of its business, is hardly tenable. such ownership is clearly postulated in section 14 of the indian partnership act 1932, which runs thus:'14. subject to contract between the partners, the property of the firm includes all property and rights and interests in property originally brought into the stock ..... personal property only by means of an instrument in writing. it may be mentioned here that there is no provision in the indian partnership act corresponding to section 22 of the english partnership act, 1890. that being so the legal fiction which permits partnership realty being treated as personalty as between partners infer se is not available here and the need for execution of an instrument ..... . a partner is not entitled to get his share in specie in the movable and immovable properties of the firm. section 48 of the indian partnership act provides that, on dissolution of the firm, its assets must first be applied for payment of the debts and liabilities of the firm and if any residue is left after .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 28 1969 (HC)

Kishore Chand Ramji Dass Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Oct-28-1969

Reported in : [1970]77ITR76(P& H)

..... that previous year, (ii) before the end of the previous year in any other case; (b) where the firm is registered under the indian partnership act, 1932 (ix of 1932), or where the deed of partnership is registered under the indian registration act, 1908 (xvi of 1908), before the end of the previous year of the firm, and (c) where the application is for renewal of ..... , 1953, be made before the 28th february, 1953, and for any year of assessment subsequent thereto, be made-(a) where the firm is not registered under the indian partnership act. 1932 (ix of 1932), or where the deed of partnership is not registered under the indian registration act, 1908 (xvi of 1908), and the application for registration is being made for the first time under the ..... of the said act.14. in so far as question no. 2 is concerned, it is already answered by a decision of ..... , partners 5 and 6, who were admitted only to the benefits of the partnership according to clause 4, that supports the conclusion of the learned tribunal that the minors were in fact made substantial partners contrary to section 30 of the indian partnership act, 1930, and thus the registration of the partnership was rightly refused as being void because it was hit by section 30 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 19 1969 (HC)

Seth Sobhag Mal Lodha and ors. Vs. Edward Mills Co. Ltd. and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Dec-19-1969

Reported in : [1972]42CompCas1(Raj); 1969()WLN498

..... on behalf of the firm. there was, therefore, no question of realising the property of a dissolved firm. after the partition suit the firm began to be governed by the indian partnership act. in this view of the matter, subsection (3) of section 69 will not apply to this case to enable the plaintiffs to file a suit without the registration of the ..... the necessary incidence and the resolution on the demises of the partners, if it could be deemed to have continued after their deaths, stood dissolved under section 42 of the indian partnership act on defendant no. 2's adjudication as insolvent3. that the provisions in the memorandum of association and the articles of association of the company relating to the management are merely ..... the filing of the partition suit, the status of the joint family underwent a change and the business became a partnership business. under section 69 of the indian partnership act, 1932, no suit could have been instituted unless the partnership was registered. section 69 of the indian partnership act, 1932, runs as follows :' (1) no suit to enforce a right arising from a contract or conferred by ..... joint family, even if it was joint, was changed and thereafter as the business was carried on jointly, the firm became an ordinary partnership concern subject to the indian partnership act. as the firm was not registered, section 69 of the partnership act stood in the way of filing the suit without the registration of the firm.8. that in the balance-sheet a sum of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 24 1969 (HC)

Pl. Rm. Arunachalam Chettiar Vs. Controller of Estate Duty

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Feb-24-1969

Reported in : [1970]75ITR28(Mad)

..... in the instant reference.3. the law seems to be so well settled now that it is impossible to accept mr. thyagarajan's proposition mentioned above. section 29 of the indian partnership act, 1932, which deals with the rights of transfer of a partner's interest, lays down by its second sub-section that, if a firm were dissolved the transferee from an ..... is nothing on record to show that there was anything like an administration of the firm's assets and liabilities involving the various steps contemplated by section 48 of the indian partnership act, 1932, before the residue was divided between the sharers, and from this standpoint too, the deceased's interest in his one-fourth share in the firm's assets was ..... of each partner is, in the words of lindley : 'his proportion of the partnership assets after they have been all realised and converted into money, and all the ..... and particularly the following passage in it:'it is abvious that the act contemplates complete liquidation of the assets of the partnership as a preliminary to the settlement of accounts between partners upon dissolution of the firm and it will, therefore, be correct to say that, for the purposes of the indian partnership act, and irrespective of any mutual agreement between the partners, the share .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 06 1969 (HC)

St. Teresa's Oil Mills Vs. State of Kerala

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Nov-06-1969

Reported in : [1970]76ITR365(Ker); [1970]25STC497(Ker)

unnikrishna kurup, j.1. the petitioner in this tax revision case is the assessee, a firm registered under the indian partnership act, 1932. besides running an oil mill it is also engaged in the hulling of paddy for persons who bring it for conversion into rice. the accounts of the petitioner for ..... in each case. the privy council had occasion to consider the exact import of the expression 'to the best of his judgment' occurring in section 23(4) of the indian income-tax act, 1922 (see commissioner of income-tax v. laxminarain badridas, [1937] 5 i.t.r. 170, 180 (p.c.)). the privy council made the following observation in that judgment:'he ..... (the assessing authority) must not act dishonestly or vindictively or capriciously because he must exercise judgment in the matter. he must make what he honestly believes to be a fair estimate of the proper figure of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 22 1969 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax, Madhya Pradesh, Nagpur Vs. R.B. Bansilal A ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Apr-22-1969

Reported in : [1971]79ITR104(Bom)

..... be necessary to state a few facts. the assessee is a firm known as m/s. r. b. bansilal abirchand firm, kamptee, registered under the indian partnership act as well as under section 26a of the income-tax act, 1922, for the purposes of assessments. this firm has been referred to by the income-tax authorities as the 'kamptee firm' and it shall be ..... year. the assessee claimed reduction of certain amount by way of legal expenses incurred by him in connection with the said partnership suit on the ground that it was a permissible deduction under section 10(2) (xv) of the indian income-tax act, being a sum expended wholly and exclusively for the purposes of his business. it was held that though the main ..... purpose of the suit was to bring about dissolution of the partnership and for other consequential reliefs, the protection of the assets of the firm by ..... also appointed to take the accounts of the partnership. 27. having set out the full facts leading up to the decree on consent passed by the supreme court, it will be useful now to turn to the questions referred to for the decision of this court under section 66(2) of the indian income-tax act, 1922. in spite of the consent decree .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 25 1969 (HC)

Firm Sitaram Agarwal Vs. Harnath and anr.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Feb-25-1969

Reported in : AIR1970Raj99; 1969()WLN91

..... ,' and file the statement.i have already made a reference to these three requirements of section 59 and they bring out the difference between the provisions of the limited partnership act, 1907 and the indian partnership act. it cannot therefore be said that the portion extracted by their lordships in jayalakshmi rice and oil mills contractors co.'s case, air 1967 andh pra 99 can ..... be a proper guide for the interpretation of the provisions of sections 58, 59 and 69 of the indian partnership act. their lordships disagreed with the view taken in (firm) ram prasad thakur prasad v. finn kamta prasad sita ram, air 1935 all 898 and bank of koothattukulam v. itten thomas ..... of the andhra pradesh high court were correctly decided and they fully support the reasoning adopted by me above on the wordings of sections 58, 59 and 69 of the indian partnership act.9. i may in this connection give one more reason why it is not possible for me to subscribe to the view taken in jayalakshmi rice and oil mills contractors ..... are not entitled to succeed because the registration of the firm after the institution of the suit will not save it from the bar of section 69(2) of the indian partnership act. i am fortified in this view by the decisions in air 1935 all 898 and air 1955 trav-co. 155 to which i have made a reference already, and by .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 09 1969 (HC)

V.M. Nissar Ahmed and ors., Minors by Guardian and Next Friend V.C. Ab ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-09-1969

Reported in : (1970)1MLJ512

..... will of the. sixth defendant in an effort to sustain exclusive title for the sixth defendant to the goodwill and trade mark of the firm. section 44 (g) of the indian partnership act of 1932 provides for the court, at the suit of a partner, to dissolve a firm on any ground which renders it just and equitable that the firm should be ..... pointed out that for fixing the date of dissolution, the plaint in a suit for dissolution cannot be taken as ' notice' under sub-section (2) of section 43 of the indian partnership act, having regard to the requirements of notice. the supreme court observed:it would follow therefore that the date of service of the summons accompanied by a copy of the plaint ..... no impediment to distinguish the instant case from the case before the supreme court. the essential for a valid notice under section 43 (1) of the indian partnership act, a firm and final intention to dissolve the partnership, is there. and the written statement is required to be treated as notice of that. no particular form or mode of service is prescribed for the ..... continued 'without any dissolution on the death of rasheed.7. the more difficult question is whether this is a partnership which can be dissolved by notice under section 43 (1) of the indian partnership act as a ' partnership at will.' it is only if the partnership is a partnership at will, the firm may be 'dissolved by any partner giving notice in writing to all the other .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 18 1969 (HC)

A Firm of Ramprasad Chhotalal and ors. Vs. Bai Reva

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Apr-18-1969

Reported in : AIR1970Guj269

..... due from the defendant-firm.8. we may incidentally refer to the effect of the dissolution of the partnership or say winding up of the partnership arising under the provisions of the indian partnership act. in order to wind up the affairs of a dissolved partnership it is necessary first to pay its debts and then to settle other questions of amount between the parties ..... the partnership firm are affected thereby. such a right continues in the creditor unless it ..... in time. it was said that as soon as chhotalal died, the partnership stood dissolved by reason of his death as contemplated under section 42(c) of the indian partnership act and, therefore, the debt became payable with effect from that date. on a perusal of the provisions of the indian partnership act, we find no provision which says that the rights of the strangers to ..... . in other words, the consequences of a dissolution of a partnership arise both as regards the creidtors and as regards .....

Tag this Judgment!


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