Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act Year: 2006 Page 1 of about 280 results (0.069 seconds)

Dec 15 2006 (SC)

M.V. Karunakaran Vs. Krishanan (Dead) by Lrs.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Dec-15-2006

Reported in : AIR2007SC1501; 2007(3)ALD39(SC); 2007(2)AWC1145(SC); 2007(1)KLT243(SC); (2007)147PLR247; 2006(14)SCALE7; 2007AIRSCW2027; 2007(3)CivilLJ685; 2007(3)AIRKarR350(SC)

..... keeping in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, could not have been determined in such a proceeding. section 29 of the indian partnership act, 1932 states as to what would be the interest of transferee of a partner. sub-section (2) thereof determines the right of a transferee ..... his heirs and ors. : [1966]3scr400 , this court opined:.the whole concept of partnership is to embark upon a joint venture and for that purchase to bring in as capital money or even property including immovable property. once that is ..... if the firm is dissolved or if the transferring partner ceases to be a partner thereof. the right the respective purchaser from the erstwhile partner of dissolved partnership, therefore, was required to be worked out in an independent proceeding.7. in addanki narayanappa and anr. v. bhaskara krishnappa (dead) and thereafter ..... they have not derived any share. therefore, the respondents had no right to offer resistance.5. it is not in dispute that the partnership stood dissolved on the death of madhavan. the heirs and legal representatives, therefore, could transfer the property at least to the extent of their ..... appeal preferred by the appellant herein.2. three brothers, madhavan, bahuleyan and karunakaran, were owners of the property. madhavan and bahuleyan started a partnership under the name and style of 'the trustful daily banking company'. madhavan died on 26.10.1960, leaving behind defendant nos. 3 to 5 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 28 2006 (HC)

Tetali Chinna Krishna Reddy Vs. Konala Nagalakshmi and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Feb-28-2006

Reported in : 2006(4)ALD596; 2006(3)ARBLR575(AP)

..... award.(6) a party aggrieved by such an arbitral award may make an application for setting aside such an arbitral award in accordance with section 34.section 44 of the indian partnership act, reads as under:section 44: dissolution by the court:-at the suit of a partner, the court may dissolve a firm on any of the following grounds, namely:(a) that ..... be allowed to be determined by the arbitrators in the guise of clause 22. further, the learned counsel also drawn the attention of this court to section 44 of the indian partnership act and submitted that in spite of there being a negative recital as to claiming dissolution, since complicated questions of law and facts are involved in this case including dissolution of ..... shall be final, conclusive and binding upon the parties, their heirs, legal representatives and successors.23. in all the matters not specifically provided for in this deed, the provisions of indian partnership act, 1932 for the time being in force shall apply.12. it is also necessary to notice sections 8, 11 and 16 of the arbitration and conciliation ..... act, 1996 as well as section 44 of the indian partnership act, 1932. sections 8, 11 and 16 of the arbitration act reads as under:section 8: power to refer parties to arbitration where there is an arbitration agreement:-(1) a judicial authority .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 07 2006 (SC)

Purushottam and anr. Vs. Shivraj Fine Art Litho Works and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Nov-07-2006

Reported in : 2007(1)AWC878(SC); 2006(2)CTLJ269(SC); JT2007(4)SC564; (2007)1MLJ623(SC); 2006(12)SCALE232; 2006AIRSCW5898

..... impugned judgment and order of april 10, 1992 allowed the appeal and dismissed the suit holding that in view of the provisions of section 69(2) of the indian partnership act (hereinafter referred to as the 'act'), the suit was not maintainable, the plaintiff being an unregistered firm.2. the facts of the case are not in dispute and they will be briefly noticed ..... it.15. in haldiram bhujiawala and anr. (supra) this court noticed the recommendations made by the special committee in its report which was considered by the legislature while enacting the partnership act, 1932. the committee recommended that registration of firms be made optional as it considered making registration compulsory too drastic for a beginning in india. it was proposed that registration should ..... paper mart' as the sole proprietor of the concern. during this period he supplied goods to the defendant firm namely - shivraj fine arts litho works, a firm registered under the partnership act. defendants 2 to 9 were the partners of the said firm. in the year 1974, special civil suit no. 9 of 1974 was filed for dissolution of the defendant ..... and anr. v. bhaskara krishnappa (d) and ors. : [1966]3scr400 this court held:it seems to us that looking to the scheme of the indian act no other view can reasonably be taken. the whole concept of partnership is to embark upon a joint venture and for that purpose to bring in as capital money or even property including immovable property. once that .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 03 2006 (HC)

Ess Vee Traders and ors. Vs. Ambuja Cement Rajasthan Limited

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Jul-03-2006

Reported in : 2006(3)ARBLR152(Delhi); IV(2006)BC289; 131(2006)DLT341; 2006(90)DRJ293

..... registration is a mandatory pre-condition for the institution of a suit or other proceeding as contemplated under section 69(2) and (3) of the indian partnership act, 1932. if on the date of institution of the suit or proceeding, the firm is not registered, subsequent registration during the pendency of the ..... 69 were substantive provisions intended to discourage non-registration of firms. it also held that the provisions of section 69(2) of the indian partnership act, 1932 were mandatory and make the registration of a firm a condition precedent to the institution of a suit of the nature mentioned therein. obviously, ..... ors. air 1978 del 92, wherein the said division bench had taken the view that the point of time contemplated in section 69(2) of the indian partnership act, 1932 was the time of institution of the suit. the division bench had taken the view that sub-sections (1) and (2) of section ..... the partners inter se or between the partners and firms for the purpose of enforcing a right arising from a contract or conferred by the indian partnership act unless the same is registered and the person suing is or has been shown in the register of firms as a partner in the firm ..... 3 are the partners of the said firm. according to the learned counsel for the respondent in view of the provisions of section 69 of the indian partnership act, 1932, the effect of non-registration of the petitioner no. 1 firm would be that it would be barred from instituting the present petition. the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 29 2006 (HC)

Om Prakash Vs. Gordhan and ors.

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Mar-29-2006

Reported in : 2006(2)MPLJ497

..... enacting it, the previous law on the subject and the mischief which the statute intended to cure should be looked into. under the law as it stood prior to the indian partnership act, an active partner who had retired from a firm could continue to remain liable for the debts contracted subsequently by the continuing firm unless those who had previous dealings with ..... is an admitted position that no public notice was issued with regard to retirement of the appellant from the firm.section 45 of the indian partnership act, 1932 reads as under with regard to liability of partners:45. liability for acts of partner done after dissolution.- (1) notwithstanding the dissolution of a firm, the partners continue to be liable as such a third ..... the firm if done before retirement.the division bench further held as under after analyzing the provisions of sections 32(5) and 45 of the partnership act and the earlier provision of the indian contract act:- section 32(3) therefore enacts a liability on the well known principle of holding out. this principle is also recognized in the case of dissolution, under section ..... 45 of the partnership act. the partnership act is an amending enactment and is by no means a complete one. it repealed ch. xi of the indian contract act which contained provisions relating to the law of partnership. it is well recognized rule of construction that for a due appraisement of the content of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 12 2006 (HC)

Kolor Syama Raju Vs. Sri Venkateshwara Mahal and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jul-12-2006

Reported in : 2006(6)ALD278

..... the judgment-debtor from the firm, was in accordance with the provisions of sections 32 and 72 of the indian partnership act, 1932, for short 'the act'. learned counsel submits that the so-called retirement of the judgment-debtor from the firm, is a collusive act, to defeat the award passed by the lok adalat in the suit. he places reliance upon the judgment of ..... a consent award before the lok adalat, but left the enforcement of the award to be sorted out, between the appellant and the respondent herein.10. section 32 of the act is basically enacted, with an object of protecting the interest of third parties, and in particular, the creditors of a firm. its purport is to the effect that if a ..... murthy, learned counsel, for the appellant is that the retirement of the judgment-debtor from the firm, was not in accordance with the provisions of the act.8. sections 32 and 72 of the act prescribe a detailed procedure, in the matter of retirement of partners from the firm, and the consequences flowing from out of it. while section 72 exclusively deals .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 12 2006 (SC)

Shreedhar Govind Kamerkar Vs. Yesahwant Govind Kamerkar and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Dec-12-2006

Reported in : 2007(3)BomCR1010; 2006(14)SCALE174; 2007(1)LC0054(SC)

..... the admission of the parties as also the other materials available on records. 15. what forms the property of the firm is stated in section 14 of the indian partnership act, 1932 (for short, 'the act'). it reads as under:14. the property of the firm.- subject to contract between the partners, the property of the firm includes all property and rights and interests ..... the said suit, inter alia, the following issues were framed:1. whether the plaintiff proves that the partnership firm of m/s shreedhar govind kamerkar was/is registered under the indian partnership act?2. is the answer to the above issue is in the affirmative, whether the plaintiff proves that the business known as deepak provision center and the shop premises on the ..... his right, title and interest in the tenanted premises in contravention of section 15 of the bombay act and, thus, liable for eviction. we are concerned with a partnership. assignment of tenancy having regard to the statutory provision would not attract section 23 of the indian contract act. even otherwise in a case of this nature, the said question does not arise.20. in ..... significance. admission, as is well-known, is the best proof of a claim. section 58 of the indian evidence act states that the facts admitted need not be proved. the very fact that the royalty received in respect of the said premises was being deposited in the partnership account is a clear pointer to show that the same was the property of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 08 2006 (HC)

Mr. Diljeet Titus, Advocate Vs. Mr. Alfred A. Adebare and ors.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : May-08-2006

Reported in : 130(2006)DLT330; 2006(32)PTC609(Del)

..... the plaintiff and the defendants. in this behalf learned counsel referred to section 6 of the indian partnership act, 1932 which provides for a mode of determining existence of partnership and reads as under: 6. mode of determining existence of partnership ' in determining whether a group of persons is or is not a firm or whether a person is or is not a partner in ..... where the legal business is being run as a sole proprietorship concern.62. there is no documentation placed by the defendants on record to substantiate any such written arrangement of partnership. this aspect is important as all the parties are advocates and engaged in the pursuit of the legal profession. the parties would be expected to define their relationship and scope ..... investigations had revealed that the defendants had converted the data and put it to their use and utility and prima facie committed offences under section 381/385/386 ipc and section 66 of the it act though investigations were still continuing as per the report.17. learned counsel also referred to the tds certificate issued by the plaintiff to the defendants to show ..... york based upon the old english doctrine of restraint of trade, as prevailing in ancient times. when a rule of english law receives statutory recognition by the indian legislature, it is the language of the act which determines the scope, uninfluenced by the manner in which the analogous provision comes to be construed narrowly, or, otherwise modified, in order to bring the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 27 2006 (HC)

Paul Mathew and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax and anr.

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Jun-27-2006

Reported in : (2006)204CTR(Ker)229; [2007]288ITR190(Ker); 2006(3)KLT905

..... partner with liability for losses, even though he was a minor at the relevant date since his date of birth was 11th july, 1952 thereby violating the provisions of the indian partnership act. further the officer also noticed that application for registration in form no. 11a filed on 31st march, 1971 was a forged document since application was not signed by all the ..... committed not by the ao but by the father who had forged signature of the other partners. so far as the partnership act is concerned the fact that the partners are father and sons makes no difference. the essential elements of a partnership are that there must be an agreement entered into by all the persons concerned, such agreement must be to share ..... the profits of a business and the business must be carried on by all or any of the persons concerned, acting for all. the first element of partnership referred to earlier is the relation between the persons who have agreed to share the profits of the business carried on by all or any of the ..... opportunity to the assessee to explain and not to cure the defects. counsel submitted since the partnership deed was forged one, there is no question of curing the defects. a forged document cannot be acted upon. the mere fact that the partners have subsequently executed a partnership deed would not make valid a document which was invalid ab initio. counsel made reference to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 09 2006 (HC)

N.B. Krishna Kurup Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Jun-09-2006

Reported in : AIR2006Ker309

..... royal was not in existence. further, in ext. r4(b), the lessee is described as 'm/s. hotel royal, partnership firm registered under the indian partnership act.' at the same time, the 4th respondent admits that hotel royal does not have a registration as a partnership firm.16. as such, i find that since hotel royal did not have registration as a firm, the firm ..... disqualifications if any of other firms in which any of the partners are common partners, is not normally adverted to or considered. similarly the registration certificates of the firms, under partnership act, are also not normally insisted or called for production. what is required is only registration needed for handling food and beverages in india. main importance is given to the aspects ..... documents to be submitted, at page 19 of the writ petition, item 3 reads thus:3. in case of firm registered under the partnership act, 1932 - proof of partners along with certificate of registration, details of business and partnership deed etc., duly attested by notary.counsel for respondents would contend that it is required only if the firm is registered and in case ..... annexure a to the tender documents at page 22 of the writ petition. serial nos. 3 and 5 of the same reads thus:3. status of the bidder:- company/partnership firm/individual - please specify. xx xx xx5. in case of firm registered under the partnership act, 1932 - please enclose details of partners along with the certificate of registration, details of their business and .....

Tag this Judgment!

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