Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Oct-27-1999
Reported in : [2000(84)FLR764]; (2000)ILLJ1225Bom
..... i), maharashtra and goa under section 7-a of the employees' provident funds and miscellaneous provisions act, 1952, hereinafter referred to as 'the act'.2. facts giving rise to this petition are that the 2nd respondent is a partnership firm duly registered under the indian partnership act. since last 125 years the firm has been engaged in 'trading and commerce activities', having its ..... office at princess street, mumbai. respondent no. 2 is duly registered under the bombay shops and establishments act. this establishment, hereinafter for brevity's sake, is described ..... trading activity for several years. the mere fact that respondent no. 2 ultimately consolidated the accounts of the two units, for the purposes of the companies act and the income-tax act, cannot result in a conclusion that, therefore, the two units constitute one establishment. it is not unknown that where one and the same company establishes separate ..... i am of the opinion that respondent no. 1, has rightly come to the conclusion that the two units are two separate establishments. section 2-a of the act makes the expression 'establishment' as embracing departments or branches of an establishment irrespective of where they are located. thus a difference in location of different departments and branches, .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Decided on : Jan-08-1999
Reported in : AIR1999Mad246
..... , the manufacturer of the transformer was impleaded as a party to the suit. according to the fourth defendant, the claim of the plaintiff was barred under section 69 of the indian partnership act and the fourth defendant was an unnecessary party. according to the fourth defendant the transformer was sold to madurai electricity system of the tamil nadu electricity board and the fourth ..... pleaded that there was no proper maintenance and that it was only due to the negligence of defendants 1 to 3. it is also pleaded that the accident was an act of god and therefore, the fourth defendant cannot be held liable. the fourth defendant also pleaded that they were unnecessary party, having been brought on record without proper notice and .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT
Decided on : Jul-05-1999
Reported in : (2000)74ITD65(Bang.)
..... . their arguments are taken into consideration.4. shri madan advanced an argument that the appellant-firm is a registered firm under the indian partnership act, 1932. the appellant-firm was entitled to the benefit provided under s. 80-i of the it act, 1961. but the ao refused to give such deduction on the ground that the assessee's business involved only 'processing' and not ..... as 'manufacture'.according to the learned representative the cit(a) held the entire exercise as processing instead of manufacture, denying the assessee the benefit of s. 80-i of the it act, 1961. the ao considered various high courts and supreme court's decisions. but according to the learned representative for the appellant the said decisions are entirely in respect of processing ..... under karnataka poultry & livestock feed (regulation of manufacture & sale) order, 1987, it is registered as a feed manufacturer. there are other papers also on record being part i. the factories act, 1948, wherein the definition of 'factory' is given. the factory means any premises including the precincts thereof wherein 10 or more workers are working or were working on any day ..... present case and the end-product did not change from its original qualities and, therefore, the assessee is not entitled to get the deduction under s. 80-i of the it act, 1961.18. the learned representative for the assessee shri madan distinguished the decision of the madras (sick-kerala) high court in eminent enterprises vs. cit (1999) 154 (ker) 513 : ( .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Decided on : Mar-09-1999
Reported in : 1999(2)CTC13; (1999)IIMLJ440
..... body corporate, a charitable or religious institution or an unincorporate company or association or any firm as defined in the indian partnership act, 1932 (central act 9 of 1932)as per section 3(d) of act of 1980, the term:' 'debtor' means any person from whom any debt is due and whose annual household ..... property the entirety of the interest should be taken into account for the purpose of determining whether they are debtors within the meaning of the act (act 36 of 1972) is correct or not.'6. the learned counsel for the appellant/plaintiff/decree holder submitted that the reference made by the ..... '.'13. on considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it is seen that if the original debtor father is entitled to the benefit of act 13 of 1980, the legal representatives are also entitled to the said benefits, but, when the original debtors is not entitled to, then his legal ..... . the question was whether the defendants are entitled to the benefit of the act.4. on consideration the learned single judge of this court, found that the decision of a single judge in lakshmi ammal and others v. sundaramurthy ..... defendants, the finding regarding execution of the decree was upheld. however, it was held that the defendants are entitled to the benefit of tamil nadu act 13 of 1980 as they constitute three different families. the plaintiff filed the second appeal, against the judgment and decree of the first appellate court .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Dec-07-1999
Reported in : (2000)1CALLT346(HC)
..... is said that ultimately the relief was for accounts and to a share in the profits. according to the respondent no. 1 section 47 of the partnership act provided for this. reference is also made to an order passed in another appeal on 18th mary, 1999 where the only question which has been left to the arbitrators is ..... the respondent no. 1 in its application under section 9 at all. even if it were held to be a partnership then the suit would not be maintainable because of section 69 of the partnership act. finally it is contended that the assets of a partnership whether moveable or immoveable can be treated as moveable, only when there was an action for dissolution of ..... has joined with other individuals or corporations within the corporate framework in some specific undertaking.'in that case it was found :'the company is in the nature of a partnership between the indian group of companies and the singapore based company who have jointly undertaken this commercial enterprise wherein they will contribute to the assets and share the risks.'34. how far ..... the principles of partnership law will be applicable to the joint venture in question is a moot point.35. in smt. smrti jaiswal v. romi jaiswal : air 1999 cal 124, ansarl .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Jun-17-1999
Reported in : ILR1999KAR193; 1999(6)KarLJ517
..... in the case of dry land one hectare and that the total extent of land after such grant does not exceed the ceiling area according to the karnataka land reforms act, 1961'.the petitioner now wants the said land by way of right. rule 4 does not confer on him a right. it gives a discretion to the authorities to grant ..... it will result in a situation where one who gets only a bit of land will become the owner of hundred of acres of land. this is not what the act contemplates. for enjoying a property measuring 2.17 acres, if a property measuring 1 acre 13 guntas is to be given, then there is no meaning for the word 'grant .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Jul-28-1999
Reported in : 98CompCas312(Kar); 1999(6)KarLJ509
order1. this revision by defendant 1 is directed against the judgment and money decree dated 15-4-1995 of the court of the learned civil judge, small causes, koppal, passed in s.c. no. 3 of 1994 decreeing the suit of r-1 (hereinafter referred to as 'the plaintiff-bank') as prayed against petitioner ('d-1' for short) and r-2 ('d-2' for short).2. certain undisputed and admitted facts are as stated under:d-l was an 'a class contractor', who was undertaking contract work of public works department ('p.w.d.' for short) in koppal taluk of raichur district. he had dealings with the plaintiff-bank since 1983. at his request and on his application, the plaintiff-bank had issued ex. p. 1 bank guarantee dated 14-7-1988 for a sum of rs. 28,740.00 in favour of the executive engineer, p.w.d., raichur ('executive engineer' for short) in connection with the execution of certain contract work of the latter that was entrusted to d-l. initially, that bank guarantee was issued for a period of one year commencing from 14-7-1988 which stood extended from time to time at the instance of d-l upto 13-7-1991 as borne out by the deeds of extension of guarantee produced at ex. p. 5 and ex. p. 6. ex. p. 2 counter indemnity bond dated 14-7-1988 was also executed by d-1 in favour of the plaintiff-bank. d-2, as surety for the said bank guarantee facility made available to d-l by the plaintiff-bank, executed 'guarantor's agreement', ex. p. 4 dated 14-7-1988 in its favour.3. when ex. p. 1 bank guarantee was .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Dec-10-1999
Reported in : [2000(84)FLR1014]; ILR2000KAR396; (2000)ILLJ1059Kant
..... leads to violation of principles of natural justice and consequently vitiates the proceedings before the tribunal under sub-section (3) of section 33 of the act and any decision given in these proceedings against the workman concerned.'10. the rationale followed by the apex court in the above decision in respect ..... domestic enquiry such a relief cannot be provided under section 33 of the act. the question is whether on such interpretation the workman could be denied the relief of subsistence allowance in a case where the labour court ..... concerned is not gainfully employed elsewhere, grant interim relief and in doing so, the quantum of subsistence allowance fixed in section 10-a of the act provides the guidelines.'9. thus, it has been held by this court that when a workman is entitled to relief of subsistence allowance pending a ..... pending before the labour court, rama jois, j, as he then was, held:'section 10-a, recently introduced into the industrial employment (standing orders) act, 1946, incorporates a uniform law governing the payment of subsistence allowance to a workman of an industry during the pendency of a domestic inquiry into complaints ..... .6. in order to arrive at an answer to question in issue it becomes necessary to (sic) excerpt section 33(3)(b) of the act to understand the scope and power of the labour court under the said provision. it reads:'33. conditions of service etc., to remain unchanged under .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Dec-31-1999
Reported in : 2000(2)ALD629; 2000(2)ALT418
..... city civil court, hyderabad, making the ex.a 12 award as rule of the court. according to the trial court, ex.a10 partnership deed was registered under the partnership act and its genuineness or otherwise cannot be challenged by the 1st defendant that too in a proceeding of this suit. the appointment of ..... arbitrator and his passing of award under ex.a12 and its registration under the indian registration act under section 17, cannot be questioned in the ..... reply dated 8-12-1988, ex.a7 no mention has been made about the oral gift. on the other hand, the plaintiff produced deeds of partnership exs.a9 and a10 whereby the plaintiff and the 3rd defendant entered into an agreement to develop the schedule property. the appellant did not vacate the ..... rent of rs. 1,200/-. the lease expired already. while so the 3rd defendant with a view to develop the schedule property entered into partnership with the plaintiff and a deed was executed between them on 1-4-1986. thereafter some disputes arose between the plaintiff and the 3rd defendant and ..... present suit as the suit was filed for eviction of 1 st defendant and not for setting aside the partnership deed or the award ex.a 12 nor for cancellation of .....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!