TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Statutory Vesting of Assets in Company: No Separate Deed Required</h1> <h3>LKS. Gold House (P.) Ltd. Versus LKS. Gold Palace</h3> LKS. Gold House (P.) Ltd. Versus LKS. Gold Palace - [2005] 57 SCL 362 (MAD.) Issues:- Validity of the copyright assignment from a partnership firm to a private limited company under the Copyright Act.- Interpretation of statutory provisions under the Companies Act regarding the transfer of assets from a partnership firm to a private limited company.Analysis:1. Validity of Copyright Assignment:The suit involved a dispute over the copyright of an artistic logo between a private limited company and a partnership firm. The defendants sought to reject the plaint on the grounds that there was no valid assignment of the copyright from the partnership firm to the plaintiff company as required by Section 19 of the Copyright Act. The plaintiff argued that since the partnership firm had been converted into a private limited company and the assets were taken over as a going concern, no formal transfer of copyright was necessary. The court examined the documents and found that the private limited company was formed to acquire the partnership firm along with its assets and liabilities. The court held that under Section 575 of the Companies Act, there was a statutory vesting of all assets of the partnership firm into the private limited company, obviating the need for a separate written assignment deed. Citing legal precedents, the court concluded that no transfer of copyright was involved, and the rejection of the plaint on this ground was dismissed.2. Interpretation of Companies Act Provisions:The court delved into the provisions of the Companies Act, particularly Part IX, which allows for the registration of a partnership firm as a company. It analyzed the characteristics of a joint stock company as defined in the Act, emphasizing the fixed share capital, division into shares, and exclusivity for members. By scrutinizing the Memorandum and Articles of Association of the plaintiff company, the court determined that it met the criteria of a joint stock company. The court emphasized that compliance with the Companies Act requirements during incorporation resulted in a statutory vesting of assets from the partnership firm to the private limited company. Legal precedents were cited to support the conclusion that no formal transfer was necessary in such cases. The court highlighted that the conversion of a partnership into a registered company automatically vests the property of the partnership in the company without the need for a separate conveyance. Consequently, the court dismissed the application to reject the plaint, ruling in favor of the plaintiff company based on the statutory provisions and legal principles outlined in the judgment.
TaxTMI 