Back
SUNEET KUMAR, RAJENDRA KUMAR IV
Shiva Enterprises – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Suneet Kumar, J.
1. Heard Sri M.D. Singh Shekhar and Sri M.C. Chaturvedi, learned Senior Counsels assisted by Shri R.D. Tiwari and Shri Arun Kumar, learned counsels for the petitioners, and Sri Narendra Kumar Pandey and Ms. Sudha Pandey, learned counsel for respondent Bank.
2. The first petitioner i.e. M/s Shiva Enterprises, is a proprietorship firm, second petitioner is the proprietor of the firm. The firm is engaged in the business of construction. Initially, petitioner-firm was a partnership firm which was subsequently dissolved in 2008, thereafter, became a sole proprietorship firm. The firm has a current account, with overdraft facility, being Account No. 1886009300021932, with Panjab National Bank, Branch Kidwai Nagar, Kanpur Nagar.
3. On 9 July 2009, partnership firm in the name and style M/s Maa Gayatri Construction was constituted, wherein, one Ranveer Singh and second petitioner were partners. The firm was having facility of current account being Account No. 1886002100023313 in the same branch of the respondent-bank. On 11 July 2011, one of the partner of M/s Maa Gayatri Construction filed an application with the fourth respondent stating therein that the partnersh
Partners of a firm are jointly and severally liable for cheque dishonor under the Negotiable Instruments Act, irrespective of whether a partner has formally resigned, as long as they were part of the....
It is true that jurisdiction of High Court under Art. 226 is an extraordinary jurisdiction vested in High Court not for purpose of declaring the private rights of the parties but for purpose of ensur....
The legal principle established is that a partner may retire with the consent of all parties, and unequivocal admissions are necessary for judgment on admissions.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the dissolution of a partnership firm under the Indian Partnership Act, 1932, and the reconstitution of the firm are governed by specific prov....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of mutual agreement for partnership dissolution and the significance of partnership deeds in determining the intention of the pa....
A suit for declaration regarding the character of an asset as partnership property is maintainable under Section 34 of the Specific Relief Act before seeking dissolution, and the Court has the power ....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
