Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: partition act 1893 section 5 representation of parties under disability Year: 1965 Page 1 of about 10 results (0.292 seconds)

Dec 16 1965 (HC)

Ramaswami Pillai Vs. Subramania Pillai and anr.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Dec-16-1965

Reported in : AIR1967Mad156

..... (1) this revision raise the question as to the scope of the jurisdiction of the court under section 4 of the partition act (iv of 1893):"whether a sharer can claim to buy out a stranger--transferee of a share in a family dwelling house, in a suit for partition instituted not by the stranger-transferee but by a member of the family.?"(2) the facts of ..... .(11) reference was also made by counsel to banchhanidhi v. balaram, and haradhone halder v. ushacharan,. in the latter case it is observed:"the language again, though not quite happy, is not altogether incapable of a wider meaning. the section refers to a suit for partition and it is well known that a party in a partition suit, whether a plaintiff or a defendant, is at ..... interpretation of a section. in a suit for partition, the parties to the suit are in the position of counter claimants and it can very well be predicated of a defendant in a suit for partition that he is suing for partition. in my opinion, the present case is within the ambit of the section".(10) the decision of henderson j. in ram dulal v. benode behari ..... not been considered necessary. in all the decisions, reference is made to air 1929 cal 269 and sheodhar prasad v. kishun prasad, air 1941 pat 4 refers to air 1929 cal 269, as authority for the position that"in a partition suit each party is in the position of a plaintiff as well as defendant and that therefore even if the transferee be .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 16 1965 (HC)

Ramaswami Pillai Vs. Subramania Pillai by Power-of-attorney Agent Karu ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Dec-16-1965

Reported in : (1966)2MLJ132

..... 1. this revision raises the question as to the scope of the jurisdiction of the court under section 4 of the partition act (iv of 1893):whether a sharer can claim to buy out a stranger-transferee of a share in a family dwelling house, in a suit for partition instituted not by the stranger-transferee but by a member of the family? 2. the facts ..... reference was also made by counsel to benchhanidhi v. balaram : air1951ori180 and haradhone haldar v. ushacharan : air1955cal292 . in the latter case it is observed:the language again, though not quite happy, is not altogether incapable of a wider meaning. the section refers to a suit for partition and it is well-known that a party in a partition suit, whether a plaintiff or a defendant, ..... interpretation of the section. in a suit for partition, the parties to the suit are in the position of counter claimants and it can very well be predicated of a defendant in a suit for partition that he is suing for partition. in my opinion, the present case is within the ambit of the section. 11. the decision of henderson, j., in ramulal v. bmode behari ..... a stranger-transferee has not been considered necessary. in all the decisions, reference is made to satyabhama v. jatindra mohan : air1929cal269 and sheodhar prasad v. rishun prasad : air1941pat4 refers to satyabhama v. jatindra mohan : air1929cal269 as authority for the position that:in a partition suit each party is in the position of a plaintiff as well as defendant and that therefore even if the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 15 1965 (HC)

Krishnadas Vithaldas Sanjanwala Vs. the State of Gujarat and ors.

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Oct-15-1965

Reported in : (1966)7GLR244

..... passed on 15th june 1961, came into operation only on 1st september 1961. in section 2, sub-section (4) of the act, this is described as the 'appointed day'. section 2(5) defines a 'ceiling area' as meaning the extent of land determined under section 5 to be the ceiling area section 2, sub-section (6) defines the 'class of land' as meaning any one of four classes of lands ..... contravention of the provisions of the act, forfeiture follows; but he submits that, in the other three cases, obviously, the parties cannot be blamed as they happen to acquire surplus lands on account of either the operation of law or by exercise of the right to demand a partition or by the change of character of the land from exempted to non-exempted ..... land. mr. nanavati contends that inasmuch as no distinct provision has been made forbidding acquisition of land by succession, partition ..... or conversion of exempted lands into non-exempted lands, a provision has been made under section 26 of the act for dealing with such cases and such cases are dealt with exactly in the same manner as cases of ordinary surplus lands .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 03 1965 (HC)

Pingle Venkatrama Reddy (Died) and anr. Vs. Income Tax and Expenditure ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Dec-03-1965

Reported in : AIR1966AP318

..... me respondent that he would not allow an allowance of rupees 3,000 each for every additional coparcener in addition to the allowance pertaining to the two sons under sections 5 and 6 of the act. 5. the respondent filed a counter. he stated therein that the assessee petitioner is a hindu undivided family, consisting of himself as kartha and his two sons. for the ..... that, in regard to the expenditure incurred by the petitioner's sons and their sons from or out of the income or property allotted to them, the deductions permissible under law as per sections 5 and 6 would not be applicable there is nothing tangible to indicate what view the respondent will take on this point. therefore, i do not express my view ..... separate shares cannot be included in the expenditure of the notional joint family. the stand taken on behalf of the petitioner before the respondent was that there was a complete partition of all the properties of the joint family. though the bharatkhand cotton mills properly was not subjected at that stage to a physical division, there was nevertheless a final and ..... shown to have assumed jurisdiction which they do not possess. in attempting to bypass the provisions of the income-tax act by inviting the high court to decide questions which are primarily within the jurisdiction of the revenue authorities, the party approaching the court has often to ask the court to make assumptions of facts which remain to be investigated by the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 26 1965 (HC)

P. Parukutty Amma and anr. Vs. K.M. Ramanunni Nair and ors.

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Nov-26-1965

Reported in : AIR1966Ker150

..... the plaintiff had necessarily to make certain amendments to the original plaint : and therefore the suit appears to have been amended, claiming partition under sub-section (3) of section 7 of the hindu succession act. 1956 (central act 30 of 1956) no doubt there appears to have been a challenge directed as against the order of the trial court, allowing ..... eye of law. to more or less the same effect is the full bench decision of this court, to which i was also a party, reported in kathyee cotton mills ltd., alwaye v. padmanabha pillai, 1957 ker lt 1175: (air 1958 ker 88) (fb). as to what further action can be taken, on the ..... madras high court in (1909) ilr 32 mad 305 referred to above dissents from the view expressed by the full bench of the allahabad high court in (1893) ilr 16 all 65 (fb) as also from the view expressed in the earlier division bench decision of the madras high court in (1897) ilr 20 ..... bench decision of the allahabad high court reported in jainti prasad v. bachu singh. (1893) ilr 15 all 65 (fb) no doubt that decision is based upon the provisions contained in section 54 of the code of civil procedure which was then in force, viz., act xv of 1877. corresponding to order 7 rule 11(c) ..... court because it will he seen that a full bench of the madras high court, reported in gavaranga sahu v botokrishna pathro, (1909) ilr 32 mad 306 has specifically dissented from the view expressed in (1893) ilr 16 all 65 and in (1897) ilr 20 mad 319 and has approved and followed the views .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 09 1965 (SC)

V.N. SarIn Vs. Ajit Kumar Poplai

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-09-1965

Reported in : AIR1966SC432; [1966]1SCR349; 1976(1)SLJ455(SC)

..... the following sections, 'transfer of property' means an act by which a living person conveys property, in present or in future ..... view that a partition is a transfer for the purpose of s. 53 of the transfer of property act. it will be recalled that the decision of the question as to whether a partition under hindu law is a transfer within the meaning of s. 53, naturally depends upon the definition of the word 'transfer' prescribed by s. 5 of the said act. section 5 provides that in ..... (6) is erroneous in law. that is how the only point which arises for our decision is whethere the partition of the coparcenary property among the, coparceners could be said to be an acquisition by transfer under section 14 (6) of the act. 6. the act was passed in 1958 to provide, inter alia, for the control of rents and evictions in certain areas in ..... , to one or more other living persons, or to himself, or to himself and one or more other living persons. it must be conceded that in a number of cases, the high courts in india have held that partition .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 28 1965 (HC)

Khan Bahadur Chowakkaran Keloth Mammad Keyi Vs. Wealth Tax Officer, Ca ...

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Oct-28-1965

Reported in : AIR1966Ker77; [1966]60ITR737(Ker)

..... of the assessment. even if the partition was on the 25th july, 1958, and not earlier as contended, section 20(1) would slill apply. this section corresponds to section 25a of the indian income-tax act 1922, the principle of which has been explained in lakhmichand v. income-tax commissioner, west bengal, : [1959]35itr416(sc) . i think the plea raised under section 20(1) requires reconsideration by the ..... is allowed. o. p. 674 of 1958 also is allowed, on the ground that the moplah marumakkalhayam tarwad of the petitioner is outside the purview of section 3 of the act. the demand nolice is quashed. the parties in both these petitions shall bear their costs.gopalan nambiyar, j.18. o. p.no. 674 of 1958: the 0. p. challenges the validity of ..... dealing with the peculiar features of a hindu undivided family :'the hindu undivided family with all its incidents is purely a creature of hindu law and cannot be created by act of parties. it is because of the peculiar characteristic of the institution which distinguishes it from an association of persons or a firm or a company that the taxation laws which ..... the makkattayam law, the nayar tarwad governed by the marumakkathyam law, and the aliyasantan family of south canara. the mappillas of north malabar generally follow the marumakkattayam system and the parties to this suit are governed by that law. the incidents of such group holding are now welt settled. in the case of malabar tarwads such incidents include the impartibility of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 01 1965 (HC)

T. S. Srinivasan Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Feb-01-1965

Reported in : [1965]56ITR455(Mad)

..... 000 shares belonging to the assessees wife and 500 shares each to the assessees minor daughters in the total income of the assessee under section 16(3) was lawful ?'section 16(3) of the act, in so far as it is material, reads thus :'16(3). in computing the total income of any individual for the ..... -tax officer of the division that had taken place in the family, and after an inquiry, the income-tax officer made an order under section 25-a of the income-tax act. for the assessment year 1959-60, the accounting year ending with march 31, 1959, the assessee filed a return in his status ..... partition could only be of the property of the individual. the tribunal accepted this contention and held that the appellate assistant commissioner was in error in his view that section 16(3) of the act did not apply, and allowed the appeal of the department.on the application of the assessee under section 66(1) of the act, ..... family, one can postulate a valid transfer by one member to another.we may refer to a decision of the supreme court in commissioner of income-tax v. stremann (civil appeal no. 1105 of 1963). the appeal arose out of a decision of this court rendered in an income-tax reference, where ..... learned counsel for the department to examine the records and inform us, whether this schedule was in fact submitted to the income-tax officer. mr. v. balasubramaniam confirmed the statement of the assessee that that schedule was really submitted and it is among the records.we have no doubt in our minds .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 08 1965 (HC)

Mohd. Ishaq Vs. State Govt. of Uttar Pradesh and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Nov-08-1965

Reported in : AIR1966All280

..... of accommodation becomes the accommodation or the part of the building let to a tenant. under section 3 of the act also a tenant can be sued for eviction from any accommodation in the circumstances mentioned therein. sections 5 and 6 of the act deal with the control of rent and the procedure in suits filed for the enhance ..... ment or reduction of rent. 26. under the definitions of the terms 'landlord' and 'tenant' even a tenant may be ..... been laid down in the full bench case of 1960 all lj 755: (air 1961 all 104) (fb) (supra), a district magistrate cannot under section 7 (2) of the act order the proprietor landlord to let a portion of the accommodation to one person and the remaining portion of that accommodation to another person. the ..... lj 553, 'when a tenant-in-chief vacates an accommodation by subletting ft to another person, can the district magistrate pass an order under section 7 (2) of the act to him to sublet it to another person or to his landlord, e,g the owner of the accommodation, to let it to another ..... or whether it consists of more than one accommodation depends upon circumstances such as tenancy contract. see 1962 all lj 553 (supra) to which i was party. in n. c. agarwal v. krishan lal mehra, 1960 all lj 755: (air 1961 all 104 fb), dayal, j. said at p. 757 (of all lj): (at p .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 19 1965 (SC)

Jaora Sugar Mills (P) Ltd. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Apr-19-1965

Reported in : AIR1966SC416; [1966]1SCR523

..... him in excess of the amount due from him under any state act and the rules made thereunder.' 14. section 4 provides that nothing in this act shall be construed as validating section 11 of the bombay sugarcane cess act, 1948 [bombay act no. 82 of 1948] and accordingly the said section shall be omitted. section 5 refers to the amendment of u. p. sugarcane cess ..... was passed. it has also received the assent of the president the same day. this act purports to validate the imposition and collection of cesses on sugarcane under ten different acts passed by the legislature of seven different states. section 3 of the act is the main validating section. section 5 purported to amend the specified provision in the u. p. sugarcane cess [validation ..... . before dealing with these contentions, it is necessary to refer to the provisions of the act. the act purports to have been passed to validate the imposition and collection of cesses on sugarcane under certain state acts and to amend the u. p. sugarcane cess [validation] act 1961. section 5 which was achieved this latter purpose has already been mentioned. with the aid ..... ] act, 1961. the said section was brought into force at once, and the remaining provisions of the act were to come into force .....

Tag this Judgment!


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