Posts

Showing posts from August, 2024
Show all

Appointment of arbitrator by LRS of deceased partner - "Party" as used in partnership deed does not exclude inclusion of legal heirs,legal representatives.

Post a Comment

One partner of partnership firm filed suit for dissolution of firm without giving notice under Section 43 of Partnership Act - Notice under Section 43 is not mandatory for filing suit for dissolution Court is vested with power to dissolve firm.

Post a Comment

Partnership at will Suit filed by some partners for dissolution of partnership with effect from use of filing of suit - Service of suit summons constitutes service of notice of dissolution and date of communication is date of service of summons Service of summons of plaint constitutes compliance of section 43 -

Post a Comment

Suit instituted by one Partner - Death of Partner - Maintainability of Suit - Plaint in Suit by Partnership Firm can be signed by any one of Partners - Suit already instituted by one Partner can be continued even after death of Partner - Suit instituted by one Partner very well maintainable and does not suffer from any defect.

Post a Comment

Suit filed against firm and its three partners was decreed - No agreement with third party and partners of reconstituted firm Public notice of retirement Modes of public notice contemplated u/s.72 not followed-Retiring partner cannot escape.

Post a Comment

Sec.69(2) will get attracted only when the suit is filed to enforce a right arising from a contract - If the suit is for enforcing a common law right, then, even an unregistered firm can do so - any transfer made by one Partner in respect of his interest in Firm would not confer any right upon transferee - Assignee cannot demand accounts from existing Partner during continuance of Firm Transferee is only entitled to receive share of profits of his transferring share in Firm.

Post a Comment

Lender of money filed suit against partnership firm and its partners for recovery of money - Two partners contended that they had retired - retiring partner continues to be liable until public notice is given of his retirement.

Post a Comment

Acknowledgement of liability by one partner binds firm and other partners - Partner disputing his signature in document acknowledging liability - courts compared disputed signatures with admitted signatures to hold that acknowledgement letter was signed by one partner Such comparison by court is valid and correct.

Post a Comment

'S' carried on business in particular name and died intestate and some of his legal heirs continued business under same name and style after death of 'S' - Plaintiff claimed share in profits of firm earned and legal heirs who carried on business are legally bound to render accounts till the date on wich the firm get dissolved.

Post a Comment

Rendition of Accounts - When a partner of a firm dies or ceases to be a partner and surviving partners or continuing partners carry on business without final settlement of accounts as between them and outgoing partner or his estate, profits and goodwill are payable even after dissolution of firm.

Post a Comment

Suit property contributed as share capital by Defendants in Partnership entered into with Plaintiffs - cannot seek Decree of Prohibitory Injunction against other Partners regarding enjoyment of property -

Post a Comment

Defendant's Father blended his personal property to partnership firm - Property once blended into Partnership business does not automatically revert on dissolution of Partnership - Subsequent dispute between Partners will not affect nature of Agreement and arrangement during existence of Partnership Firm - Defendant's father estopped from taking different stand later - Sale deed executed by father not valid.

Post a Comment

Partnership at will - One of Partners died - Suit filed by said Partner dismissed for non-prosecution after Defendants/other Partners were set ex-parte - It would not amount to dissolving Firm - Firm is dissolved only by death of Partner and rights of deceased Partner do not get extinguished and his share induding goodwill devolve upon his legal heirs in absence of a contract to contrary.

Post a Comment

Amount borrowed on 9.3.1989 and agreed to be repaid on 24.3.1989 - three years period would expire on 23.3.1992 - Suit filed on 23.3.1992 is well within period of limitation - Partnership firm consisting of two partners constituted on 30.6.1987 and dissolved on 10.5.1989 - Amount borrowed by one partner for firm on 9.3.1989 - every partner as agent of other partners Plaintiff can therefore sue from and all partners All partners are jointly and severatly liable

Post a Comment

Suit filed against partners in name of firm - Every partner of firm is jointly and severally liable for all acts of firm - decree passed against firm is in effect decree against all partners.

Post a Comment

Applications To Condone Delay In Filing Written Statements Filed Before 'New India Assurance 2' Decision Can't Be Summarily Rejected: Supreme Court

Post a Comment

Can A Person Who Is Ineligible To Be An Arbitrator Nominate Arbitrator? Supreme Court Reserves Judgment

Post a Comment

Production of title deeds of the property as a security towards the debt amounts to the creation of a 'mortgage by deposit of title deeds' under Section 58 (f) of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882

Post a Comment

Property subject matter of prior mortgage can attach and sale in execution.

Post a Comment

Sale of property - subject matter of prior mortgage - Decree holder withdraw amount he entitled - JD Filed application to withdraw the balance amount - Auction purchaser filed objection that,Till the mortgage is discharged amount can't withdrawn - objection rejected - JD is entitled to withdraw surplus amount.

Post a Comment

Even during pendency of suit - if there is no prohibitory order for collecting property tax - collecting property tax is no bar

Post a Comment

Stridhan is the exclusive property of the woman, and her father cannot claim recovery of Stridhan from in-laws without explicit authorisation from her

Post a Comment

Interest pendente lite and future interest (i.e. interest post-decree not exceeding 6 per cent. per annum) shall be awarded on such principal sum i.e. the principal sum adjudged on the date of the suit.

Post a Comment

‘Not preferring an appeal against the preliminary decree is not a bar to an appeal against the final decree,’

Post a Comment

Power of the Arbitrator to - grant pre-reference interest, pendente lite interest, and post-award interest under Section 31(7) of the Act is fairly well-settled.

Post a Comment

Sale and issuance of a sale certificate as per Rule 9 (7) of the rules is a complete and absolute sale for the purpose of SARFAESI Act and the same need not be registered under the provisions of the Registration Act.

Post a Comment

The Amendment Act, the District Judge has the power now to revise an order of the Court of Small Causes even though it was passed before the Amendment Act came into force.

Post a Comment
Image

Important Citations Regarding Patta

Post a Comment

வழக்கு நிலுவையில் இருக்கும் போது பட்டா மாறுதல் போன்ற நடவடிக்கைகளில் வருவாய்த்துறை அதிகாரிகள் ஈடுபடக்கூடாது

Post a Comment

Father can gift of ancestral proeprty within reasonable limits in favour of his married daughter - plea taken by father his daughter in law misrepresented the charactor of the deed - not tenable.

Post a Comment

Central Amendment Act 39 of 2005 came into force pending Appeal - Court can take Judicial notice of change in legislation - Properties which was sale before amendment will not available for partition.

Post a Comment

Court of appeal may given effect to such a law even after the judgment of the Court of first instance.

Post a Comment

Plaintiff filed a suit for declaration that he is the real owner of the suit house and the transaction was benami - The Act came into force during pendency of appeal before the Supreme Court - subsequent event could be taken note of and the Act being retroactive in operation, the suit could not be decreed.

Post a Comment

Even if the decision on a question of law has been reversed or modified by subsequent decision of a superior court in any other case it shall not be a ground for review of such judgment - subsequent change in law would not take away such rights which had attained finality due to lis coming to an end inter se the parties prior to such change."

Post a Comment

As per the recital in the agreements, the defendant was required to get the suit land surveyed and as such the total consideration was agreed to be settled after such survey - No evidence regarding demand made by the plaintiff for survey - Readiness and villingness not proved - 'readiness and willingness' of the plaintiff to be averred and proved and it is a condition precedent to obtain the relief of specific performance.

Post a Comment

Partition between father and his brothers - Share allotted to father in ancestral property - Father died intestate in 1965 - property devolved under section 8 - daughters entitled to equal share - Sale made by brother exceeding his share not binding on daughters - property devolved under section 8, limitation not applicable for filing suit for partition.

Post a Comment

Purchase of cars by the company for personal use of its directors - It could not be said that such car was purchased by the company for its "commercial purpose - overheating was a 'defect' within the meaning of Section 2(1)(f) - Incomplete disclosure of details of airbags is unfair trade practice.

Post a Comment
Image

மதம் மாறியவர்கள் ஜாதியை இழந்துவிடுவார்கள் - தாய் மதம் திரும்பியவர்கள் மனப்பூர்வமாக இருந்தால் இழந்த ஜாதியை திரும்ப பெறலாம்.

Post a Comment

Once insufficient stamped admitted in evidence,it's admissibility can't be questioned subsequent stage - no insufficiently instrument shall be admitted in evidence, unless it is duly stamped - court can Impound - Once insufficient stamped document admitted in evidence,it can't be recalled -

Post a Comment

States' Power To Tax Mining Rights & Mineral-Bearing Lands Not Limited By MMDR Act; Royalty Not Tax: Supreme Court Holds By 8 :1 - clarify that the effect of today’s verdict will be prospective on 31-07-2024.

Post a Comment

Mere Insult To SC/ST Member Not Offence Under SC/ST Act Unless Intent Was To Humiliate Based On Caste Identity: Supreme Court

Post a Comment