Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: retirement partnership Page 1 of about 9,359 results (0.037 seconds)

Nov 15 2016 (SC)

Ananthesh Bhakta Reptd. by Moter Usha a Bhakta and Ors Vs. Nayana S. B ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... , the court was not entitled to make the reference relying on arbitration agreement. (3) whether dispute pertaining to unregistered partnership deed cannot be referred to an arbitration despite there being arbitration agreement in the deed of retirement/partnership deed. issue no.(1) 12. two facts which emerged from record in this respect need to be noted. firstly, the plaintiffs in their plaint of ..... o.s.no.5 of 2014 have referred to and admitted the retirement deed dated 25.07.2005 and partnership deed dated 05.04.2006 in para 5 ..... when the court is considering the application shall not entail rejection of the application under section 8(2).23. in the present case it is relevant to note the retirement deed and partnership deed have also been relied by the plaintiffs. hence, the argument of plaintiffs that defendants' application i.a.no.iv was not accompanied by original deeds, hence, liable ..... certified copy thereof along with the application seeking reference to the arbitration. (ii) all the parties to the suit were not parties to the arbitration agreement as claimed in retirement deed and partnership deed. hence, dispute could not have been refereed to the arbitrator. (iii) the firm being an unregistered firm, no reference to the arbitration can be made with regard to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 04 1979 (HC)

Board of Revenue U.P. Vs. Auto Sales, Allahabad

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1979All312

..... side of the continuing partners in favour of the retiring partners. 20. in govind das v. board of revenue 1971 all lj ..... will apply with equal force in the case of retirement. 19. for what has been said above, two things are clear. one is that a partner stands on the same footing in relation to partnership as a co-owner. secondly, on retirement, there is no transfer of interest either from the side of the retiring partnership in favour of the continuing partners or from the ..... 847, a special bench of this court was called upon to consider the question whether the deed of retirement, on account of the payment of ..... exactly what happened in the present case.' 13. in this case, it would be noticed that the view taken by the full bench was that a retiring partner does not sell his interest in the partnership to the continuing partners. he only gets his interest carved out. 14. in a. narayanappa v. b. krishnappa : air1959ap380 , a full bench of the aforesaid court .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 20 1989 (HC)

Nariman Aspandiar Irani Vs. Adi Merwan Irani

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1989Bom362; 1989(2)BomCR533; (1989)91BOMLR252

..... .38. in my opinion, therefore, having regard to the meaning of the words, 'in any other manner', the transfer of tenant's interest through the mode of dissolution of partnership or retirement from partnership is a transfer forbidden by section 15(1) of the bombay rent act .39. my conclusions on the question of the validity of the transfer of tenancy may be ..... the plaintiff's instance. i therefore, make the following decree.(i) so far as prayer (a) is concerned, the suit is dismissed with this modification that the plaintiff's retirement from the partnership or relinquishment of his share in favour of the defendant shall not effect the transfer of the plaintiff's share in the tenancy. both of them continue to be ..... sublets or assigns his interest - the obvious modes named by the statute - or the tenancy is made over to another through the medium of dissolution of a firm or retirement from the partnership, the result is identical; for, the tenant's interest's interest has been parted with. aware of this possibility, the legislature used these words to mean that the tenant ..... partners, the assets of the firm change hands. the document embodying the terms of dissolution or retirement which may effect transfer of immovable assets is not compulsorily registrable. but this does not necessarily mean that when a partner relinquishes his interest in the partnership , no transfer of immovable property takes place. it is not lawful for any tenant to ``sublet the whole .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 04 1975 (HC)

Manilal Jamnadas Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City I

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : [1977]109ITR278(Bom)

..... context the tribunal has observed thus : '... it is not clear that the difference is between the old position and the new. his (champaklal) ostensible retirement from the partnership does not appear to make any difference to his powers. it is true that he is no longer acknowledged as a formal partner, but if he ..... his presence at the time when reconstitution of the new firm was thought of. he stated in his statement that when he decided to retire from the erstwhile partnership it was left to the remaining partners to decide the future of the firm and he was not a party to the reconstitution of ..... concerned. 10. the two material recitals which are to be found in the documents run thus : 'and whereas the said champaklal jamnadas shah retired from the said firm (partnership) as from kartak sud 1st of s.y. 2014, i.e., 24th day of october, 1957, leaving the said business to be carried ..... having regard to the manner in which the bank account was opened, having regard to the fact that even after the so-called retirement of champaklal from the erstwhile partnership firm, the percentage of profit which champaklal group retained was the same in the new firm and having regard to clauses 11 and ..... aspects which emerge clearly on record, there is yet one aspect which emerges and that is, though champaklal is said to have retired from the erstwhile partnership, his retirement has not caused any loss to the group of partners belonging to the champaklal branch in the matter of percentage of share in the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 05 1974 (HC)

Addl. Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat Vs. Nagindas Kilabhai and Co ...

Court : Gujarat

Reported in : [1975]101ITR197(Guj)

..... case, the tribunal was correct in law in holding that the expenses of rs. 26,136 incurred by the assessee on stamp duty, registration fees, etc., of the deed of retirement of partnership should be allowed as business expenditure ?' 4. on behalf of the revenue, the learned advocate, mr. kaji, contended in the first instance that the expenses in question have nothing ..... decision of this court in commissioner of income-tax v. mohanbhai pamabhai. where the court was concerned with the question of the payment made on relinquishment of interest in partnership assets by a retiring partners, and whether such payment can be brought to tax as capital gains under section 45 of the income-tax act, 1961. the division bench of this court ..... , therefore, it cannot be urged that in the present case there is any transfer or for that matter any sale of the rights, interests, or shares of the retiring partners in the partnership assets of the old firm to the new firm. 12. on a close scrutiny of the terms and conditions contained in the deed of dissolution, the arrangement appears to ..... supreme court, it is a right to obtain his share of profits from time to time during the subsistence of the partnership and on dissolution of the partnership or his retirement from the partnership, to get the value of his share in the net partnership assets which remain after satisfying the liabilities set out in clause (a) and sub-clauses (i), (ii) and (iii) of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 29 1985 (HC)

Jani Nautamlal Venishankar, Wadhwan Vs. Vivekanand Co-operative Housin ...

Court : Gujarat

Reported in : AIR1986Guj162; (1985)2GLR1264

..... view of the aforesaid settled legal position, it is obvious that despite not giving of a public notice by defendant no. 3 about his retirement from the partnership firm of defendant no. 1 the knowledge which the plaintiff society had of the said fact through intimation given to its manager and secretary ..... is reached, a short question of law arises for consideration. defendant no. 3 was admittedly, partner of defendant no. 1 firm. he retired from the partnership with effect from 1-41969. but that came to the knowledge of the plaintiff society through kantilal dasadia on 22-8-1969. it is also ..... information supplied by defendant no. 3 to kantilal was not passed on to them and that they never knew that defendant no. 3 had retired ' from the partnership firm of defendant no. 1 as alleged by him in his written statement. when these witnesses entered the witness box, they very well ..... therefore, obvious that the plaintiff firm had been informed through kantilal who was managing affairs of the plaintiff society that defendant no. 3 had retired from the partnership on 1-4-1969 and that information reached the plaintiff society through kantilal on 22-8-1969. witness kantilal has also proved writing below ex ..... ' attached to the plaint and submitted that the payments made by the plaintiff society to defendant no. 1 firm after defendant no. 3 retired from the partnership i.e. after 1-4-1969 or in any case after the knowledge thereof was transmitted to the plaintiff society through its secretary mr. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 17 2003 (HC)

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Marudhar Hotel (P) Ltd.

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : (2003)184CTR(Raj)372; [2004]269ITR310(Raj); RLW2003(4)Raj2458

..... get his share in profits and losses so long as his status as a partner continues and upon dissolution of the firm or retirement from partnership to claim his share in partnership assets in accordance with the partnership act and agreement of partnership after satisfying the liabilities of the firm and as a part of taking accounts.12. this brings to the fore, the question ..... share in profits from time to time and also right to share in the net assets of the firm on its dissolution or on his retirement in accordance with the provisions of partnership act and terms of partnership agreement. all these rights fructify in future. the credit to his capital account is only notional value and not the value of consideration as the ..... date, it is impossible to determine the value of consideration, which lies in the womb of future. this value can only be computed in future when the partnership is dissolved or the partner retires and the asset of the firm are distributed to the partners on a future date.in sunil siddharthbhai's case (supra) the incoming partner had brought shares of ..... the womb of the future. it is impossible to conceive of evaluating the consideration acquired by the partner when he brings his personal asset into the partnership firm when neither the date of dissolution or retirement can be envisaged nor can there be any ascertainment of liabilities and prior charges which may not have even arisen yet....'with the aforesaid conclusion that .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 17 2003 (HC)

Cit Vs. Marudhar Hotel (P) Ltd.

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : [2003]130TAXMAN403(Raj)

..... get his share in profits and losses so long as his status as a partner continues and upon dissolution of the firm or retirement from partnership to claim his share in partnership assets in accordance with the partnership act and agreement of partnership after satisfying the liabilities of the firm and as a part of taking accounts.18. this brings to the fore, the question ..... share in profits from time to time and also right to share in the net assets of the firm on its dissolution or on his retirement in accordance with the provisions of partnership act and terms of partnership agreement. all these rights fructify in future. the credit to his capital account is only notional value and not the value of consideration as the ..... that date, it is impossible to determine the value of consideration, which lies in the womb of future. this value can only be computed in future when the partnership is dissolved or the partner retires and the asset of the firm are distributed to the partners on a future date.37. in sunil sidharthbhai's case (supra) the incoming partner has brought ..... the womb of the future. it is impossible to conceive of evaluating the consideration acquired by the partner when he brings his personal asset into the partnership firm when neither the date of dissolution or retirement can be envisaged nor can there be any ascertainment of liabilities and prior charges which may not have even arisen yet. . . .' (p. 521)with the aforesaid .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 13 1990 (SC)

M.O.H. Uduman and Others Vs. M.O.H. Aslum

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1991SC1020; (1991)1MLJ46(SC); (1991)1SCC412; [1990]Supp2SCR663; 1991(1)LC203(SC)

..... of fact and was not raised in the courts below. therefore, it cannot be raised for the first time in this court.20. in case the respondent desires to retire from partnership and the rights and liabilities are not mutually effected, it would be open to the respondent to amend the plaint appropriately and seek a decree in that regard. it is ..... and was registered as per the provisions of the french law and the business was carried on. by relinquishment deed, ex. b2 dated august 1, 1968 their father had retired from the partnership. thereafter the appellants and the respondent continued the business in terms of ex. b2. when misunderstanding between the parties had arisen, as pleaded by the respondent, in 1973 and ..... (5) also manifests the intention of the parties that so long as there exist two partners, partnership cannot be determined, although he/she may withdraw from partnership and terminate the legal relationship between himself and other partners. if one partner desires to withdraw or retires from partnership, the partnership shall continue between the remaining partners, unless all the partners mutually agree to determine the relationship ..... ) with the consent of the other partners; (b) in accordance with an express agreement by the partners; or (c) where the partnership is at will, by giving notice in writing to all of his partners of his intention to retire. for the purpose of this case sub-sections (2) and (3) are not material.13. in chapter vi, section 40 gives right .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 11 1966 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Mysore Vs. B. Shamim Shetty Brothers

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : [1967]66ITR328(KAR); [1967]66ITR328(Karn)

..... added to one another for the purpose of assessment. 2. the assessment year was 1958-59. there was a partnership which was first constituted under an instrument of partnership on may 7, 1951. there were three partners and one of them retired from the partnership on july 31, 1957. according to the statement of the case submitted to us by the appellate tribunal, the ..... to us that we should answer this question in favour of the assessee. 6. it is a familiar principle of partnership law that if one of the partners in the firm retires and the firm continues with the remaining partners, the partnership continues to exist notwithstanding the change in the composition of the firm. it is equally well-settled that when a partner ..... of the firm retires from partnership, the remaining partners have an option to continue to remain in the old firm and to continue it or to dissolve that firm and enter into a new partnership. if a are partnership is so formed by the remaining partners, that firm which is so brought into ..... remaining two partners 'formed a partnership' under an instrument of partnership executed on august 1, 1957. what the income-tax officer did was to add to the income of the .....

Tag this Judgment!


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