Court : Company Law Board CLB
Decided on : Jul-15-1999
Reported in : (1999)98CompCas463
..... that there has been a failure of mutual trust and confidence brought about by the acts of the respondents, then such acts would justify winding up of the company on just and equitable grounds as in a case of a partnership in terms of section 45(g) of the indian partnership act. he further submitted, that even though there are thirty-one shareholders, as a group ..... have been sought including for a declaration that the first petitioner continues as a director of the company and that the company is a quasi-partnership, restraining the respondents from committing any act in breach of the partnership principles in the conduct of the affairs of the company, for directions to the respondents to purchase the shares held by the petitioners or in ..... ] 33 cla 393 (clb), we held, in the facts of that case in which it was established that the company was in the guise of a partnership, removal of the petitioner as a director was an act of oppression. in the same way in naresh trehan v. hymatic agro equipments p. ltd.  97 comp cas 561 (clb) in view of the ..... the petitioner is that he was wrongly/illegally removed from the position of a director of the company and that such removal is an act of oppression in view of the company being in the nature of a partnership. in addition to this main grievance, the petitioner has also alleged siphoning off of funds, etc., by the respondents. on the basis of .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on : Jan-20-1999
Reported in : (1999)(82)LC417Tri(Mum.)bai
..... unit.14. virtually the same line of argument has been taken by the second appellant m/s. colour prints who have mentioned, inter alia, that they were a partnership firm registered under the indian partnership act since 21.9.1966 and shri gopal ram salian and shri k. ugappa malli were partners of the firm since its inception. apart from being registered by other ..... ), my views and orders in the matter are as follows.11. it is observed that the appellants m/s kalanidhi have mentioned, inter alia, that they were a partnership firm registered in the indian partnership act since 14.10.1972 and engaged in the manufacture of printed cartons, labels etc. shri gopal ram salian and smt. k. rajani ugappa malli are the partners of ..... other. in these circumstances, jdr contended that the adjudicating officer had rightly concluded that the separate registration for purposes of sales tax and income tax and separate registration of the partnership firms was only to camouflage the actual fact that both the entities were, in fact, one and the same. he referred to the recent decision of the tribunal step cosmetic ..... the department.the ld. advocate contended that m/s. kalanidhi and m/s. colour prints were separate and independent partnership firms. m/s. kalanidhi were registered under the income tax act, bombay sales tax act, central sales tax act and the shops and the establishment act and had separate bank account. m/s. colour prints were likewise holder of central excise licence for the manufacture .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Decided on : Mar-12-1999
Reported in : 1999IIIAD(Delhi)598; 1999CriLJ4276; 79(1999)DLT153; 1999(49)DRJ642; 1999RLR438
..... these questions are set out as under:- '(a) the first one being whether the suit is liable to be dismissed in view of section 69 of the indian partnership act, partnership being unregistered on the date of filing of the suit and in case the suit is to be dismissed. (b) the second question would be whether the ..... not registered on the date of filing of the suit and as such the suit would be hit by the provisions of sub-section 2 of section 69 of the partnership act.' 6. it was urged by the petitioner before the high court that at least rs. 25.40 lakhs, i.e. . (rs. 32.40 lakhs less ..... to sell the goods and to appropriate the sale proceeds. 7. the learned single judge while dismissing the suit on the ground of non-registration of the partnership, issued following directions; '...plaintiffs are also directed to take out an fdr from a nationalised bank in the sum of rs. 25.40 lakhs in the ..... observed: '... insofar as the first point concerned, mr. sahai, learned counsel for the plaintiff fairly conceded that the suit is liable to be dismissed as the partnership was not registered on the date of institution of the suit. the position in law is that where the suit is filed by the partners it shall be ..... second respondent is the wife of the first respondent. she does not seem to have played any active role in all these transactions and events. as an indian wife, dutiful and obedient, she seems to have only followed the dictates and desires of her husband. in the process she has done no more than .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kerala
Decided on : Nov-01-1999
Reported in : (2000)160CTR(Ker)455
..... assessee, clause (5) had application to the facts of the case because claim was lodged on 15-10-1973. sec. 47 of the indian partnership act, 1932 (hereinafter referred to as 'the partnership act') provides that on the dissolution of a firm, authority of each partner to bind the firm, and the other mutual rights and obligation of ..... the time of dissolution. clause (5) of the deed of dissolution relates to further work, if any, in respect of business carried on by the partnership. it is evident that arbitration award was in respect of the work already done prior to dissolution of the firm. only claim was made subsequent to the ..... do or to be got done at his own expense further work, if any, required to be done in respect of the business carried by our partnership and that the said sri paily pillai alone shall be entitled to or liable for the profits or losses, as the case may be, of the ..... by tribunal. clauses (4) and (5), which are relevant, read as follows :'a. it is hereby mutually agreed that the work done by the partnership between the parties hereto till the close of the business on the 30-9-1970 have been fully measured and values thereof duly accounted.5. it is hereby ..... case of discontinued business and it cannot apply to a succession to the firm. accordingly, tribunal nullified the assessment. application under section 256(1) of the act filed by revenue was rejected. pursuant to the direction given by this ,'-'curt, question, as set out above, has been referred to this court.3. .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kerala
Decided on : Nov-01-1999
Reported in : 243ITR557(Ker)
..... the assessee, clause 5 had application to the facts of the case because the claim was lodged on october 15, 1973. section 47 of the indian partnership act, 1932 (in short, 'the partnership act'), provides that on the dissolution of a firm, authority of each partner to bind the firm, and the other mutual rights and obligation of ..... the time of dissolution. clause 5 of the deed of dissolution relates to further work, if any, in respect of the business carried on by the partnership. it is evident that the arbitration award was in respect of the work already done prior to the dissolution of the firm. the only claim was ..... do or to be got done at his own expense further work, if any, required to be done in respect of the business carried by our partnership and that the said sri paily pillai alone shall be entitled to or liable for the profits or losses, as the case may be, of the ..... by the tribunal. clauses 4 and 5, which are relevant, read as follows :'4. it is hereby mutually agreed that the work done by the partnership between the parties hereto till the close of the business on the 30th day of september, 1970, have been fully measured and values thereof duly accounted. 5 ..... the person who carried on the business had such sum been received before such discontinuance.' 5. the said provision was introduced by the taxation laws (amendment)act, 1975, with effect from april 1, 1976. this provision, inter alia,provides that any sum received after the discontinuance of a business is,for and .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT
Decided on : Apr-15-1999
Reported in : (2000)72ITD262(Bang.)
..... of "business" should not be considered to be restricted to the concept as envisaged under the it act, and on the other hand construction of building and running lodging house amounted to business for the purpose of indian partnership act. this particular judgment related to allowance of registration of the firm and does not seem to ..... hon'ble karnataka high court held that there was no finding by the tribunal that the assessee was the owner of the property, that the partnership deed itself provided that at the end of the lease period, the surviving partners had to handover possession of the leased property with the building ..... originally constituted to carry on the business of dealing in real estate and setting up, development and exploitation of the commercial complex and market. the partnership deed also provided in that line. as to the question of whether the assessee was carrying on a business activity or not and whether the income ..... clear that if a person receives rental income by leasing out the property as its owner, then the income may come under s. 22 of the it act, 1961. but if the leasing of the property was done as part of the business concern, the income received therefrom, cannot be said to ..... business or it may be done as landowner. whether it is the one or the other must necessarily depend upon the object with which the act is done ........ but a company formed with the specific object of acquiring properties not with the view to leasing them as property but to selling .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Sep-15-1999
Reported in : (2000)124PLR238
..... allegations of the plaintiff.5. from the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed by the trial court:-'1. whether the plaintiff is a firm registered under the indian partnership act? opp2. whether the damage to the consignment of 11 bundles of empty bags was due to accidental fire and not due to the negligence of the railways. if so, its ..... dass, commission agents, lehragaga, filed a money suit in the sum of rs. 2,800/- and it was pleaded by the plaintiff that the plaintiff-firm is registered under the indian partnership act and raghbir chand is one of the registered partners. an order was placed upon m/s mittal brothers, calcutta, for 11 bundles of empty gunny bags from hawra to lehragaga ..... the negligence or misconduct of its officers was responsible for the damages cannot be said to be an acknowledgement of liability within the meaning of section 19 of the limitation act. the above said principle applies to the present suit. it having not been established that a clear admission had been made by the commercial inspector and that he was authorised ..... damages to the goods is thus established from this evidence to have occurred prior to 23.11.1972.10. article 10 of the limitation act which is in the same terms as article 30 of the repealed act, reads as under: -10. against a carrier for three year when the loss compensation for losing or or injury occurs. injuring goodsthe limitation thus .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Sep-17-1999
Reported in : (2000)125PLR530
..... it stood discharged in view of the provision of punjab agricultural indebtedness relief act, 1975.4. from the above short1 pleadings of the parties, the learned trial court framed the following issues:-1. whether plaintiff firm is a registered firm under indian partnership act? opp2. whether the defendant borrowed rs. 8,800/- from the plaintiff ..... and signed an entry in the rokar bahi? opp2-a. whether the defendant is a debtor as defined in the punjab act no. 24 of 1975? if so, its effect?3 ..... goyal of bhawanigarh district sangrur, filed a money suit for a sum of rs. 8,800/- on the ground that plaintiff is a registered partnership firm and it maintains regular books of accounts and the transactions conducted by the firm are duly entered in the account books. on 13.6.1971 ..... finger expert with the admitted signatures of bhajan singh appearing on pronote p.1 and receipt p-2. even under section 73 of the indian evidence act, the court has the power to compare the signatures and many variations are bound to be there with the passage of time even in ..... the execution of the document. there are regular books of accounts of the plaintiff firm which again lend corroborative value under section 34 of the indian evidence act. lastly, it was submitted by the counsel for the plaintiff that the plea taken up by the appellant at the appellate stage was to .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Apr-22-1999
Reported in : AIR2000MP247
..... he had refused to set aside the award dated 15-1-1987 passed by the sole arbitrator. 2. the facts as have been unfolded are that the appellant is a partnership firm duly registered under the provisions of indian partnership act, 1932. the respondent no. 1. steel authority of india limited is a government of india undertaking duly incorporated under the provisions of companies ..... act, 1956. the appellant had entered into a contract with the respondent no. 1 by which he was conferred a right to recover, remove and lift iron scrap from the ..... final and binding on both the parties. the venue of arbitration shall be the ispat bhavan, bhilai steel plant. bhilai (mp). subject to above, the provision of the indian arbitration act, 1940 and of the rules thereunder and all statutory modification thereof shall govern such arbitration proceedings and shall be deemed to apply to and be incorporated in this contract.' on ..... and deal with the matters which were not within his domain. it is well settled in law that the arbitrator cannot travel outside the permissible territory and cannot choose to act arbitratorily, irrationally, capriciously or independently of the contract. his sole function is to arbitrate in terms of the contract if this is not religiously followed he falls into an .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Oct-12-1999
Reported in : (2000)124PLR842
..... ujjagar singh filed a money suit for a sum of rs. 4,760/- by alleging that the plaintiff-firm is a registered firm with the registrar of firms under the indian partnership act and ujjagar singh is the registered partner and runs a shop of commission agent. the defendant fauja singh used to took loan at different times from the plaintiff-firm. he .....Tag this Judgment!