<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1996 (4) TMI 518 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279767</link>
    <description>An unregistered partnership firm is barred from enforcing contractual rights, but Section 69(3) preserves proceedings for dissolution, accounts of a dissolved firm, and realization of its property. Because the partnership had already been dissolved by mutual consent, a reference under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 was maintainable only for claims falling within that exception. The claim for accounts of the dissolved firm was referable, and the claim to goodwill survived only up to the date of dissolution. Claims for delivery of a vehicle and for post-dissolution transactions were contractual claims outside the exception and remained barred.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Apr 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 04 Apr 2019 18:26:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=565625" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (4) TMI 518 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279767</link>
      <description>An unregistered partnership firm is barred from enforcing contractual rights, but Section 69(3) preserves proceedings for dissolution, accounts of a dissolved firm, and realization of its property. Because the partnership had already been dissolved by mutual consent, a reference under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 was maintainable only for claims falling within that exception. The claim for accounts of the dissolved firm was referable, and the claim to goodwill survived only up to the date of dissolution. Claims for delivery of a vehicle and for post-dissolution transactions were contractual claims outside the exception and remained barred.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Apr 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279767</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>