Court : DRAT Madras
Decided on : Dec-11-2008
..... this tribunal comes to the irresistible conclusion that section-69(2) of the partnership act clearly imposes a bar to initiate any proceedings to enforce the right under a contract entered into by the appellant firm, which is not a registered one on the one hand, and the respondent bank on the other. it follows necessarily that the reasoning ..... person suing is or has been shown in the register of firms as a partner in the firm. (2) no suit to enforce a right arising from a contract shall be instituted in any court by or on behalf of a firm against any third party unless the firm is registered and the persons suing are or have been ..... indian partnership act, 1932. section-69 of the partnership act reads as follows :- 69. effect of non-registration. (1) no suit to enforce a right arising from a contract or conferred by this act, shall be instituted in any court by or on behalf of any person suing as a partner in a firm against the firm or any ..... (a) the provisions of sub-sections (1) and (2) shall apply also to a claim of set-off or other proceeding to enforce a right arising from a contract. 9. it is no doubt true that the dispute between the appellant and the respondent bank arose on the basis of a ..... contract whereby the appellant availed credit facilities from the respondent bank and therefore, ld. counsel for the respondent has contended that in view of the dictum of law laid .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : DRAT Madras
Decided on : Jun-30-2008
..... and since the attaching creditor is entitled to attach only the right, title and interest of the judgment-debtor, the attachment cannot be free from the obligations incurred under the contract for sale. though section 64 cpc was intended to protect the attaching creditor, but if the subsequent conveyance is in pursuance of an agreement for sale which was before the ..... by the said 3rd defendant in favour of the appellant, he filed the civil suit in os-9443/2004 before the city civil court, bangalore, for specific performance of the contract against her. the fact that the same property was attached by the bank of baroda in an earlier proceedings before the recovery officer in dcp no.2583 in oa no ..... 291 vannarakkal kallalathil sreedharan vs. chandramaath balakrishnan, wherein the honble supreme court laid down the principles of law as under :- under a contract of sale entered into before attachment the conveyance after attachment in pursuance of the contract passes on good title in spite of the attachment. the agreement for sale indeed creates an obligation attached to the ownership of property .....Tag this Judgment!