Skip to content


Firm Name - Judgment Search Results

Home > Cases Phrase: firm name Page 1 of about 1,625 results (0.016 seconds)
Apr 22 1943 (PC)

Firm Chunni Lal Mansa Ram Through L. Vidya Ram Vs. Firm Sheo Prasad Ba ...

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: AIR1943All370

the defendant's mill (that is Sidh Nath) that the defendant firm had become somewhat careless in complying with its requests about rightly held that such evidence as Sidh Nath did give, namely, that the defendant firm all along told him that they

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Apr 14 1971 (HC)

Firm Poonamchand Shankarlal and Co., Bombay Vs. Firm Deepchand Sireyma ...

Court: Madhya Pradesh

Reported in: AIR1972MP40

showing that the goods pledged were in possession of that firm. But more than that in the present case it is notice or knowledge that the goods stood insured in the name of the plaintiff-firm. Thirdly, even if the. policies of insurance

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Apr 07 1962 (HC)

Firm Bachhraj Amolakchand and anr. Vs. Firm Nandlal Sitaram and ors.

Court: Madhya Pradesh

Reported in: AIR1966MP145

refused to take delivery and claimed damages from the plaintiff firm, charging it with breach of contract. Thereupon, the plaintiff firm

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Sep 26 1935 (PC)

(Firm) Danmal Parshotam Dass Vs. (Firm) Babu Ram-chhote Lal

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: AIR1936All3

to have been a partner in the firm unless the firm is registered and the person suing is or has been intention was to allow time to people, trading under the name of an unregistered firm, to come to know of the

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

May 16 1921 (PC)

Firm Kirpa Ram Sita Ram Vs. Firm Mangal Sen Bishan Mal

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: AIR1922All367; 65Ind.Cas.93

firm's name but as individuals and proprietors of the contracting firm in Delhi and also proprietors of the other firm in additional partner was a member of the firm in Cawnpore, namely, one Jugal Kishore, and at one time, he distinctly held

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Sep 04 1935 (PC)

(Firm) Meghraj-roormal Vs. (Firm) Anup Singh-battu Mal

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: AIR1935All1004

Champa Ram v. Tulshi Ram 1927 All. 617.2. The defendant firm entered into certain forward contracts for the purchase of grain-pits

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Sep 04 1935 (PC)

Firm Meghraj Roormal Vs. Firm Anup Singh-battu Mal

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 159Ind.Cas.984

there is no escape from the conclusion that the plaintiff firm was within its rights in selling the grain-pits on February

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Mar 29 1962 (HC)

Firm Paras Ram Ram Sarup and ors. Vs. Firm Baldev Sahai Ram Bhagat and ...

Court: Punjab and Haryana

Reported in: AIR1963P& H215

or authority to restrict the application of Section 63(2) to firms with more than two partners, and such a distinction cannot and Sham Sunder became the partners of the firm. The name of the firm, however, remained the same. The counsel for

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Apr 08 1959 (HC)

Firm Munshi Ram Ruplal Vs. Firm Madanlal Chaman Parkash Sethi and ors.

Court: Punjab and Haryana

Reported in: AIR1960P& H15

(1) The facts giving rise to this second appeal are as follows: Plaintiff-firm is working as commission agents at Jullundur...

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Jul 14 1952 (HC)

Firm Des Raj Prem Chand and anr. Vs. Firm Hira Lal Kali Ram and anr.

Court: Punjab and Haryana

Reported in: AIR1952P& H415

place which described itself in the plaint as the registered firm Hira Lal-Kali Ram 'alias' Krishna Dehati Store.2. The plaintiff's case

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

  • << Prev.

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