Appeal dismissed; merger validity not reopened, leasehold rights transferred to corporate debtor formed liquidation estate; section 36(4)(a)(iv) inapp...
The HC allowed the petition and set aside the impugned attachment notice against the petitioner, holding that liability of a deceased partner's legal representative under s.159 is confined to the value of the estate inherited and cannot exceed inherited assets. The court found the respondent had mechanically attached the petitioner's bank account containing only Rs. 60,002 and there was no evidence the petitioner had inherited assets of partners of the defaulting firm; therefore the attachment was unlawful. The respondents remain at liberty to pursue recovery against the partnership firm, its partners and their legal heirs in accordance with s.159 read with s.189 of the 1961 Act.
The HC allowed the petition and set aside the impugned attachment notice against the petitioner, holding that liability of a deceased partner's legal representative under s.159 is confined to the value of the estate inherited and cannot exceed inherited assets. The court found the respondent had mechanically attached the petitioner's bank account containing only Rs. 60,002 and there was no evidence the petitioner had inherited assets of partners of the defaulting firm; therefore the attachment was unlawful. The respondents remain at liberty to pursue recovery against the partnership firm, its partners and their legal heirs in accordance with s.159 read with s.189 of the 1961 Act.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
