SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1970 Supreme(Guj) 106

B.J.DIVAN, P.N.BHAGWATI, T.U.MEHTA
VRAJLAL MAKANDAS VALIYA – Appellant
Versus
L. D. JOSHI, COLLECTOR, DIST. BHAVNAGAR – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: D.U.SHAH, J.R.NANAVATI

BHAGWATI, C. J.

( 1 ) THIS is a reference made to us by the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority under sec. 54 (1a) of the Bombay Stamp Act 1958 The question which arises for consideration on the reference is as to what is the proper Article of the Act under which a certain instrument executed between the partners of Messrs. Veto Industries is chargeable. To determine the question it is necessary to refer briefly to a few facts giving rise to the reference. Prior to Aso Vad Amas Samvat Year 2021 ten persons carried on business in partnership in the firm name of Messrs. Velo Industries. Three of them retired from the firm with effect from Aso Vad Amas Samvat Year 2021 leaving the other seven as continuing partners of the firm. The terms and conditions of retirement were recorded in an instrument dated 24/10/1963 executed by and between the partners and since the entire controversy between the parties has turned on the true interpretation of this instrument it would be desirable to set out some of its material provisions in extenso. They read according to their English translation:-1 We have retired from the firm of Messrs. Velo industries with effect from Aso Vad Amas Samvat Year 202








Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top