Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 7 of 7 (0.34 seconds)The Customs Act, 1962
M/S Vesco Product Company vs Sh.Rajinder Nath Pathak on 8 December, 2010
14. This judgement was followed by this court in the decision of the
decision of M/s Vesco Product Company vs. Sh. Rajinder Nath Pathak in
RSA No. 182/2002 and CM No. 497/2002 decided on 08 th December, 2010,
wherein it was observed that the bar to Section 69(2) of the Act, 1932 arises
when the contract entered into by the partnership is "in the course of
business transaction" by the firm with its customers/defendants. Section
69(2) of the Act, 1932 is not attracted to any and every contract as to the
source of title to an asset owned by the firm. The Act, 1932 has not
prescribed that the transactions of contracts entered into by a firm with a
third party is bad in law, merely because the firm is an unregistered firm.
N.A. Munavar Hussain Sahib And Anr. vs E.R. Narayanan And Ors. on 17 June, 1983
15. The present suit has been filed by the plaintiff seeking a specific
performance of the Agreement to Sell dated 03rd June, 2010 entered into
with the defendant in respect of property bearing No. G-32, Residential
Scheme, Masjid Moth, New Delhi. There is no averment in the plaint that
the suit transaction was entered into by the plaintiff during the course of
business transaction. Likewise, the defendant has not taken any such plea in
his written statement so much so, that plea of bar of Section 69(2) of the Act,
1932 has also not been pleaded. Whether the bar of Section 69(2) of the
Act, 1932 would be attracted is a mixed fact of law, which can be
determined only after considering the evidence of both the parties as held by
the Madras High Court in N. A. Munavar Hussain Sahib & Ors. (supra) and
Jalal Mohammad Ibrahim (supra).
Jalal Mohammed Ibrahim (Died) And Ors. vs Kakka Mohammed Ghouse Sahib And Anr. on 22 February, 1971
15. The present suit has been filed by the plaintiff seeking a specific
performance of the Agreement to Sell dated 03rd June, 2010 entered into
with the defendant in respect of property bearing No. G-32, Residential
Scheme, Masjid Moth, New Delhi. There is no averment in the plaint that
the suit transaction was entered into by the plaintiff during the course of
business transaction. Likewise, the defendant has not taken any such plea in
his written statement so much so, that plea of bar of Section 69(2) of the Act,
1932 has also not been pleaded. Whether the bar of Section 69(2) of the
Act, 1932 would be attracted is a mixed fact of law, which can be
determined only after considering the evidence of both the parties as held by
the Madras High Court in N. A. Munavar Hussain Sahib & Ors. (supra) and
Jalal Mohammad Ibrahim (supra).
The Transfer Of Property Act, 1882
Section 69 in The Indian Partnership Act, 1932 [Entire Act]
1