Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act 1932 section 35 liability of estate of deceased partner Page 92 of about 1,046 results (0.142 seconds)

Pannaji Devichand Vs. Senaji Kapurchand

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1934Bom361; (1934)36BOMLR786; 152Ind.Cas.580

..... on this point various witnesses have been examined on both the sides in the bellary court, where originally the present defendants had filed a suit against the plaintiffs for the winding up and accounts of this partnership, and where their case was that they had already exercised their option on october 14 and that as many as 800 bales were sold soon after that and they demanded an account of the sale of ..... 175, that the suit could not lie, since it disclosed a partnership consisting of more than twenty persons, and so transgressed the provisions of section 4(2) of the indian companies act. ..... he says that as the defendants did not take the delivery on the vaida day, he had to borrow a large amount from creditors in order to meet his total liabilities, which included these 1500 bales for which the defendants had defaulted, and he made a debit and credit entry as to this in his khata and subsequently he gave defendants a notice that in case they did ..... the plaint in the bellary suit set out a partnership of twenty-two persons, fourteen plaintiffs and eight defendants, and was, on its face, a breach of the provisions of the indian companies act, the present plaint does not proceed on the same lines, though based on the same ..... 's arguments, the first, that no 'business' was contemplated within the terms of section 4(2) at the indian companies act, and the second that the contract evidenced by exh. ..... annum till date of suit, against the defendants' firm personally, and from their estates. .....

Commissioner of Income-tax, Karnataka-i Vs. Jagadish Jakati and Co.

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : [1979]119ITR19(KAR); [1979]119ITR19(Karn); 1978(2)KarLJ369

..... section 30 of the indian partnership act clearly lays down that a minor cannot become a partner, though with the consent of the adult partners he may be admitted to the benefits of partnership ..... partnership act, which provided that a person who was a minor according to law to which he was subjected might not be a partner in a firm, but, with the consent of all the partners for the time being, he might be admitted to the benefits of the partnership ..... the two cases : '(1) whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was right in holding that, on a proper construction of the partnership deed dated 12th october, 1967, the minor, shivashankar, was not made a full-fledged partner liable to share in the losses of the assesses firm and, hence, the assessee was entitled to the benefit of registration for the assessment year 1969-7 (2) whether, ..... partnership deed in question expressly stated in its preamble that the minors (the third and fourth members thereof) were being admitted to the benefits of the said partnership but not to the liabilities ..... partnership shall be at will and can be dissolved only by majority opinion of the partners and it shall continue not with standing retirement, death, insolvency or other incapacity of any partner, and in case of death with the legal heirs or the representatives of the deceased partner ..... any difference of opinion between the partners touching the rights and liabilities or the management of the business it shall be forthwith .....

Yusuf Vs. Hamidulla

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : 1982WLN172

..... has assiled the order of the learned additional district judge on the following grounds:(1) that the partnership firm has not been dissolved as accounts between the parties were neither rendered nor gone into nor any amount payable by one partner to the other was arrived at and during the course of trial of the suit, the plaintiff can well show that the partnership has not been dissolved under the indian partnership act (no. ..... from the management of the partnership affairs, there a case is made out for appointment of a receiver and this doctrine has been acted on even where the defendant contends that the plaintiff is not a partner or that he has no interest in the partnership assets.in that case the plaintiff had instituted a suit claiming several reliefs against the defendants including specific performance of an agreement compelling the defendants to execute a deed of partnership, dissolution of partnership and alternatively for a decree ..... case and prem prakash's case air 1976 j & k 37 and ordered that the appointment of one of the partners as receiver of the partnership business to maintain it for a period of 9 months or till an order is passed in arbitration proceedings whichever ..... for the payment of the amount regarding which their liability may be adjudged in the suit. ..... section 42 lays down that subject to the contract between the partners, a firm is dissolved on the happening of contingencies provided in clauses (a) to (d) of section ..... of 1932) (for short 'the act' hereinafter .....

Horace Kevin Gonsalves and Another Vs. Prabha Ganpat Borkar and Others

Court : Mumbai

..... who was an acting partner of m/s.drego enterprises, had implied authority to represent the firm and to execute power of attorney in favour of a third party to represent them and take an action on behalf of the firm under sections 18 and 19 of the indian partnership act, 1932. ..... the learned senior counsel, however, submits that even if this court comes to the conclusion that the petitioners have no caveatable interest in the estate of the deceased, the petitioners are entitled to urge and bring to the notice of the court that the letters of administration have been fraudulently obtained by the respondent by concealment of material ..... on behalf of the respondent, on the other hand, raises issue of maintainability of these petitions on the ground that the petitioners in both the matters were admittedly not the legal heirs of the said deceased and did not have any caveatable interest, the question of effecting any service of citation or citing the petitioners in the petition for letters of administration did not arise. ..... counsel is considered that on the date of filing of the petition for letters of administration, the respondent was not aware of any such will left by the deceased testator and thus such statement came to be made in the petition for letters of administration is accepted, in view of the fact that there is no dispute that the said deceased left a will and/or the same is discovered subsequently, such grant is liable to be revoked under section 263(b) and (c) of the act. .....

Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay South Vs. Md. Khalid Faquih and Co.

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : [1963]47ITR383(Bom)

..... summarised thus : 'section 30 of the indian partnership act clearly lays down that a minor cannot become a partner, though with the consent of the adult partners he may be admitted to the benefits of partnership. ..... hold that the deed is a valid deed admitting the minors only to the benefits of the partnership and not admitting them as full-fledged partners. ..... according to him, what has been ruled by their lordships is that if an instrument of partnership contains clauses which in express terms transcend or contravene the provisions of section 30 of the partnership act, then it is invalid in law; but, when there is no such contravention in express terms by any of the clauses of the instrument of partnership, then the court must see whether the construction leading to the validity of the deed is possible and, if such a construction is possible, the court must ..... definition of 'partner' contained in section 2(6b) of the income-tax act cannot be read to mean that in every case when a minor has, contrary to law, been admitted as a full partner, the deed is to be regarded as valid, because, under the law, a minor can only be admitted to the benefits of partnership. .....

Bestochem Formulations Vs. Dinesh Ayurvedic Agencies and Others

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 76(1998)DLT972

..... the supreme court found that on the facts of the said case the firm in question was not a registered firm under the indian partnership act and it also could not be denied that the suit was also for enforcement of the agreement entered into by the plaintiff as a partner which was an unregistered firm and that being so, the suit was undoubtedly found to be a suit for the benefit and in the interest of the firm and consequently a suit ..... counsel submitted that thus, the suit is clearly hit by section 69 of the indian partnership act and relied upon the ratio of the decision in lalit kumar & ors. vs . ..... the provisions of section 69(3)(a) would not also save the present suit from the bar of section 69 of the indian partnership act as because the suit is neither for enforcement of any right or power to realise the property of the dissolved firm, nor the same is for rendition of any accounts of the dissolved firm. ..... even otherwise defendant no.3 has taken over the activities of defendant no.2 and, thereforee, dropping of defendant no.2 will not make any difference so far as the bar of section 69 of the indian partnership act is concerned. ..... thereforee, the scope of the present application is restricted only to the extent of the objection taken by the defendants that the suit is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed in view of the provisions of section 69 of the indian partnership act, as on the date of filing of the suit, the plaintiff was not a registered firm.4. .....

K.B. and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 2000(57)DRJ208

..... cit, mysore, : [1971]82itr680(sc) , it was observed that legal requirements under section 5 of the indian partnership act, 1932 ( in short the partnership act) to constitute a partnership in law are : (i) there must be an agreement to share the profits or losses of the business; and (ii) the business must be carried on by all the partners or any of them acting for all. ..... section 2(23) of the act provides that the expressions 'firm' , 'partner' and 'partnership' have the same meaning respectively as in the partnership act. ..... part v thereof deals with 'registration of firms'.coming to the partnership act, section 4, which defines 'partnership,' runs as follows: ' 'partnership' is the relation between persons who have agreed to share the profits of a business carried on by all or any of them acting for all.'. ..... at this juncture, it is to be noted that the tribunal relied on section 33 of the partnership act to conclude that element of partnership was absent. ..... sub-section (2) clearly provides that, notwithstanding anything contained in section 27 of the indian contract act, the contract between the partners may provide that a partner shall not carry on any business other than that of the firm while he is a partner. ..... said section 33 provided that a partner may not be expelled from the partnership by any majority of the partners except in exercise of powers in good faith conferred by contract between the partners. .....

Ms. Gammon India Ltd. Vs. Commnr. of Customs, Mumbai

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... a joint venture is a legal entity with all the trap pings of a partnership under the indian partnership act, 1932, the gen eral principles of the said act were applicable to the joint venture and, therefore, any one of the two partners of the joint venture, viz. ..... of the other party except to the extent of its share of work; gam mon being most experienced party would be the lead partner of the joint venture for the performance of the contract; the partner incharge would be authorized to incur liabilities and to receive instructions for and on behalf of the partners of the joint venture, whether jointly or severally, and entire execution of the contract including receiving pay ment would be carried out ..... nhl was allowed and it was held that it was a joint venture company in the nature of a partnership be tween the indian group of companies and singapore based company which had jointly undertaken the commercial venture by contributing assets and sharing risks ..... on 1st march, 2001, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub section (1) of section 25 of the act, the central government, issued the afore noted exemption notification, inter alia, exempting the goods of the description specified in column (3) of the table given thereun der, read with ..... this civil appeal, under section 130 e(b) of the customs act, 1962 (for short the act ), is directed against order dated 4th april, 2003 passed by the customs, excise and gold (control) appellate tribunal, as it then existed, (for short the .....

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Modu Timblo (individual)

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1994)116CTR(Bom)442; [1994]206ITR647(Bom)

..... that the communion of the husband and wife was not akin to a hindu undivided family under the mitakshara system of hindu law nor to a 'firm' as defined in the indian partnership act and that it was akin to a tenancy-in-common or to the english coparcenary having a unit of title, interest and possession. ..... the decision in that case in regard to the house property income had been arrived at in view of the specific provision in regard to computation of income from house property owned by co-owners contained in section 26 of the act which clearly provides that where any house property is owned by two or more persons and their respective shares are definite and ascertainable, such persons shall not in respect of such property be assessed as an ..... that it is an admitted position that on the death of one of the spouses, communion property does not devolve by survivorship, but the half share of the deceased spouse goes by succession to his or her own heirs or legatees by virtue of articles 1122 and 1123. ..... the very same persons may receive income as co-owners, as shareholders, as partners or as members of an association of persons and their status in respect of a particular income will not affect ..... code have been summed up in purushotam gangadhar bhende's case : [1977]106itr932(bom) : '(i) during the subsistence of a marriage celebrated as per the custom of goa, the ownership and possession of 'the common estate', immovable as well as movable, vests in both the husband as well as the wife. .....

Shah Nemji Chitarmal Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : 1982WLN(UC)441

..... the office of the registrar of documents, rajasthan, jaipur, which has been marked as annexure 2 and which clearly proves that shah nemji chitarmal jain, baran was a firm registered under the provisions of the indian partnership act, 1932. ..... in the written statement the defendant railway administration had taken the objection that the notice under section 80 cpc was given by shanti kumar jain proprietor of m/s shah nemji chitarmal jain while the suit has been filed by the firm shah nemji chitarmal jain, through partner and proprietor shanti kumar and hence the notice was invalid and the suit was liable to be ..... was given by shanti kumar in his personal capacity and the specification that he was the proprietor of shah nemji chitarmal was merely a description, while the suit was filed on behalf of shah namji chitarmal a partnership firm and, therefore, the person who filed the suit was different from the person who gave the notice. ..... their lordships of the supreme court observed as under in the above mentioned case:the object of the notice contemplated by that section is to give to the concerned governments and public officers opportunity to reconsider the legal position and to make amends or settle the claim, if so advised without ..... that case there was no evidence of the prevailing market price at the destination in respect of goods lost in transit as it was held, having regard to the liability of the railway administration as a bailee, of making goods available at the destination.25. .....