Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act Year: 2002 Page 9 of about 223 results (0.095 seconds)

Oct 08 2002 (HC)

G. Sri Hari Vs. Nandkishore Lahoti and anr.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Oct-08-2002

Reported in : 2002(2)ALD(Cri)646; 2002(2)ALT(Cri)556; 2003CriLJ643

..... /s. srihari mills private limited, coimbatore, which has business transactions with the 1st respondent in his capacity as the partner of laxmi venkatesh industries, a partnership firm at warangal. in connection with those business transactions, petitioner issued some cheques to the 1st respondent, which were dishonoured for want of funds. thereafter 1st ..... learned magistrate, in the interest of justice, allowed the petition, and recorded the sworn statement and took the case on file under section 138 of the act. thus, in respect of the same transaction there are two cases i.e., one in c.c. no. 326 of 1999 for offences under section ..... magistrate recorded the sworn statement of the complainant and took the complaint on file as c.c. no. 803 of 1999 under section 138 of the act and issued summons to the petitioner. this petition is filed to quash the said complaint.3. the contention of sri c. padmanabha reddy, learned senior ..... . 127 of 1995 of geesukonda p.s., on the ground that the police have no jurisdiction to investigate into an offence under section 138 of the act, impleading the 1st respondent as 2nd respondent thereto, which was disposed of by my learned brother b. sudershan reddy, j., on 2-9-1996 with ..... p.c. for investigation and the same was registered as crime no. 152 of 1995 under section 420 i.p.c. and section 138 of the act. prior to that, during the absence of 1st respondent, the manager of laxmi venkatesh industries gave a complaint to geesukonda police, in connection with the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 11 2002 (HC)

Cit Vs. Hazarat Pir Shah-e-alam Roza Estate Trust

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Apr-11-2002

Reported in : (2002)175CTR(Guj)66

..... was illegal and of no consequence, and what had to be seen was whether the assessee was a public charitable trust on the basis of the partnership deed dated 28-11-1941, and that the power to revoke the trust was taken away by a subsequent document dated 26-8-1943. it was ..... conclusive, as provided by sub-section (2) of section 21.13.5. in this context, we may also note the provisions of section 35 of the indian evidence act, which provide that, an entry in any public or other official book, register, or record, stating a fact in issue or relevant fact, and made ..... the conclusion that the appellant was a public charitable trust and was entitled to exemption under section 4(3)(1) of the indian income tax act, 1922 and section 11 of the income tax act, 1961. (i) a division bench judgment of this court in a letters patent appeal in sayed mohomed baquir-e1-edroos ..... has exclusive jurisdiction to give such findings. these findings operate as findings in rem and, therefore, cannot be ignored by the authorities under the income tax act.17. we may now proceed to consider whether the judgment of the bombay high court in first appeal no. 188 of 1952 precluded the consideration of ..... was the property of the trust were required to be decided by the deputy charity commissioner or by the charity commissioner in appeal as provided under the act. no notice was issued to the charity commissioner in that appeal. the deputy charity. commissioner noted the following observations in the judgment of the high court .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 31 2002 (HC)

K. Narayanappa Vs. the Regional Transport Officer, Bangalore Central a ...

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Oct-31-2002

Reported in : 2003(1)KarLJ287

..... complaint was lodged in the hebbagodi police station. cognizance was taken by the learned judge. petitioner filed an application seeking release and custody of the vehicle in terms of the act. demand notice was issued to the petitioner in terms of annexure-c. aggrieved by the same, petitioner has filed an appeal. appellate authority dismissed the appeal. this appellate order is .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 06 2002 (HC)

Factory Manager, Rajashree Cements Vs. Naeem Pasha and ors.

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Sep-06-2002

Reported in : [2003(96)FLR285]; ILR2002KAR4817; 2003(1)KarLJ274; (2003)ILLJ781Kant

..... of evaluating evidence in departmental enquiries. according to the learned counsel, the labour court failed to notice that the strict rules of the indian evidence act has no application in the matter of enquiries either before the department or before the labour court. all that the labour court has to ..... them. if these rules are satisfied, the enquiry is not open to attack on the ground that the procedure laid down, in the indian evidence act for taking evidence was not strictly followed'.(emphasis supplied)26. on the power of enquiry officer during departmental enquiry to put questions and elicit ..... courts, a party is entitled to ask leading questions unless objected to by the adversary with the permission of court under section 142 of the indian evidence act which reads 'leading questions must not, if objected to by the adverse party, be asked in examination-in-chief, except with the permission ..... this is what the court has said:'it is well-settled that in a domestic enquiry the strict and sophisticated rules of evidence under the indian evidence act may not apply. all materials which are logically probative for a prudent man are permissible'.30. the finding of the labour court on ..... cannot be sustained for the reasons stated above.31. the labour court evidently has exercised the discretion under section 11a of the industrial disputes act possibly influenced by the fact that charge 2 is not proved while ordering for reinstatement and denying back wages.32. before the introduction of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 21 2002 (HC)

S. Umapathy and anr. Vs. the Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation ...

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Mar-21-2002

Reported in : ILR2002KAR2205; 2003(2)KarLJ472

..... same. therefore, annexure-p and n are also not disturbed on the peculiar facts of this case.19. mr. subba rao, learned senior counsel argued that if the respondents have acted erroneously and if the petitioners are not guilty of any fault on their part, it is not proper to recover any excess amount already paid to them. reliance is placed ..... think that this court would be justified in striking down an order of 1977 in the year 2002. the said order has withstood the test of time and has been acted upon by all concerned. any striking down at this juncture would cause unnecessary hardship to the parties concerned.14. even otherwise, it is seen that a division bench of this .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 10 2002 (HC)

Swastika Woollens Vs. Presiding Officer, Employees Provident Fund Appe ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Jan-10-2002

Reported in : (2003)ILLJ241P& H

..... losses from year to year.' 23. in the case of taneja woollen mills, the petitioner had set up the following defence:-i) that there was change in constitution of the partnership to private limited company w.e.f. 30.9.88, on account of which the present occupier could not operate bank account for a long period, which consequently caused delay ..... port and could not be retrieved. this caused heavy loss to the establishment. onaccount of which there was delay in payment of dues. ii) that change in constitution of the partnership firm to private limited company was effected on 1.4.1985. on account of which the present occupier could not operate bank accounts, which consequently caused delay in deposit of ..... and recovering the arrears. as the amounts are due to the trust fund and the recovery is not by suit, the provisions of the indian limitation act. 1963 are not attracted. 3. the position under section i4b of the act of an employer is totally different. the employer who has defaulted in making over the contributions to the trust fund had, on the ..... the units of m/s swastika wool traders private limited, ludhiana, which was set up in may 1978 at new delhi, as a partnership concern and later on converted into a private limited company. copy of the partnership deed has been placed on record as annexure r-2. according to respondent no.2, the petitioners were duty-bound to deposit the dues .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 31 2002 (HC)

Cit Vs. Dynavision Ltd.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Dec-31-2002

Reported in : [2003]128TAXMAN406(Mad)

..... that the payment is not a genuine payment as the money transferred to the trust has found its way to the assessee as the trustees have granted loans to the partnership firm in which the directors of the company are partners, and, therefore, there was no expenditure incurred by the assessee-company. we are unable to accept the said submission as ..... sum was accepted by the trust through its trustee, the appellate tribunal held that all the ingredients for the creation of a trust under sections 5 and 6 of the indian trusts act were fulfilled. the appellate tribunal rejected the contention urged on behalf of the department that since the trust deed dated 27-11-1984 was invalid, it could not be ..... the question of allowability of expenditure and rejected the contention that there was violation of section 295(1)(b) of the companies act as a sum of rs. 40 lakhs was given by the trust as loans to its partnership firm in which the directors of the assessee company were partners. the appellate tribunal held that there was no violation as the ..... found by the appellate tribunal that there were reasons for the grant of loans in favour of the partnership firm by the trustees. it was also found by the appellate tribunal that there was no violation of section 295(1)(b) of the companies act. it was found that the trustees have earned more interest than the prevailing rate of interest offered .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 22 2002 (HC)

R.K. Shewaramani Vs. Indian Drugs and Pharmaceuticals Ltd. and anr.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Mar-22-2002

Reported in : (2003)ILLJ141Del

..... , new delhi, during the years 1987 to 1989, shri r.k. shewaramani purchased shop no. 3, express market h - block shopping complex, ashok vihar, delhi in partnership with one shri g.g. shewaramani, for a sum of rs. 62,400/- in march, 1987, from m/s. express properties (p) ltd., hs-38, kailash ..... the permission of the competent authority.article-iisaid shri r.k. shewaramani made his minor children viz. master gaurav and miss sujata the partners in a partnership firm with shri g.g. shewaramani and smt. sarla devi, to own a chemist's shop in the name and style of m/s. ramesh ..... 30(a) was made on 24.04.1990. during pendency of the disciplinary proceedings only the petitioner was served with the following notice dated 07.06.1990:-'indian drugs & pharmaceuticals ltd.head office, gurgaon idp: md:estt.1(1545)/90:764dt.: 7.6.90registered a.d.memorandumshri r.k. shewaramani, medical representative ..... letter dated 17.06.1989. he was charge-sheeted inter alia on the ground that he was on indefinite strike and thus failed to maintain absolute integrity and acted in a manner unbecoming of a public servant and thereby violated rule 4(ii) and (iii) and sub-rules (5), (6), (20), (23) and ..... said shop no. 3, express market, h - block shopping complex, ashok vihar, delhi.by his aforesaid acts of omissions and commissions, the said shri r.k. shewaramani, failed to maintain absolute integrity, devotion to duty and acted in a manner unbecoming of a public servant thereby violated rule 4(1)(i), (ii) and (iii .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 25 2002 (HC)

A.R. Saravanan Vs. State Through Inspector of Police, Crime Branch Cid

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Sep-25-2002

Reported in : 2003CriLJ1140

..... i do not find any material to proceed against the petitioner for the offence under section 39(1), 44(1)(c) of indian electricity act and 484 ipc r/w. sec. 34 ipc. the charges against the petitioner is totally groundless.9. the judgments relied on by the learned senior counsel for the petitioner stated ..... the 2nd accused in c.c. no. 12 of 2001 charged for the offences under sections 39(1), 44(1)(c) of indian electricity act and 484 ipc r/w section 34 ipc has preferred this revision against the order of dismissal passed in his petition under section 239 of cr.p.c. for discharge by ..... deed dated 08-11-1999, which was re-constituted on 01-04-1985. as per the reconstituted partnership deed, the 1st accused is the managing partner, who has been looking after the business of sundaram ..... , he will be fully justified to discharge the accused, and in exercising jurisdiction under section 227 of the code of criminal procedure, the judge cannot act merely as a post office or a mouthpiece of the prosecution, but has to consider the broad probabilities of the case, the total effect of the ..... the trial court.2. it is the case of the petitioner that originally this petitioner and first accused were partners under a partnership .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 20 2002 (HC)

Pyarelal Ramkishore Prajapati Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Mar-20-2002

Reported in : 2003BomCR(Cri)103; 2002CriLJ3611; 2002(4)MhLj293

..... and 44 were of 1455 sq. ft. om shanti co-operative housing society is a registered society whereas om shanti construction company is a partnership firm.4. according to the respondent, petitioner/accused pyarelal is the kingpin and has full control over the management of the firm as also the ..... 12,000/- by the complainant towards consideration of 28 shops committed criminal breach of trust an offence punishable under section 409 read with 34, indian penal code and failed to register the agreement and without consent of respondent submitted different plans to cidco and thereby committed offence under sections 3 ..... involving any criminal offence, that also without taking permission which itself was violation of the direction of the director general of police and further act of resealing the 44 shops even during the pendency of discharge application before the magistrate, without taking orders from any court are instances which ..... intended to cheat the complainant and to dupe him. this argument is without any substance. even the authorities under the co-operative societies act have pointed out that any division or amalgamation of the society does not affect the rights of the person who has entered into contract. ..... in the f.i.r. or the complaint and that the extraordinary or inherent powers do not confer an arbitrary jurisdiction on the court to act according to its whim or caprice.'earlier in the case of state of west bengal v. sanchaita investments, reported in : 1982crilj819 , supreme court .....

Tag this Judgment!


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