The lease of land admeasuring 207 sq. yards, bearing No. 3/13, Industrial Area, Kirti Chowk, Gandhinagar, was granted by the competent authority to Amarpal Singh vide Lease Deed dated 31st December, 2010, for a term of 9
CS Professional · Drafting, Pleadings and Appearances · PYQS · December 2024
The lease of land admeasuring 207 sq. yards, bearing No. 3/13, Industrial Area, Kirti Chowk, Gandhinagar, was granted by the competent authority to Amarpal Singh vide Lease Deed dated 31st December, 2010, for a term of 99 years. Clause (b) supra of the Lease Deed of the land aforesaid, requires the lessee to obtain approval from Land & Development Officer (L&DO) before any 'assignment or transfer' of the leased premises. Clause (c) supra of the Lease Deed entitled the appellants L&DO to claim and recover unearned increase at the time of 'transfer' subsequent to the first 'transfer'. In 2012, the lessee Amarpal Singh transferred the leasehold rights in the said property to M/s Mahalaxmi Saw Mills, a partnership firm ('MSM'). The constitution of the said MSM changed from time to time but no intimation thereof was given to the appellants L&DO; as on 7th May, 1986, there were 7 partners in the partnership firm. The aforesaid seven partners of MSM, on 26th August, 2020, got incorporated as Mahalaxmi Pvt Ltd, the respondent Company, and transferred the business, assets and liabilities of partnership firm MSM to the respondent Company, at their net book value and became shareholders of respondent Company in proportion of their shares in the partnership firm. The respondent Company thereafter applied to the appellants L&DO, for mutation of the leasehold rights in the land aforesaid, from the name of MSM to the name of the respondent Company. The appellants L&DO demanded the payment of unearned increase of ₹ 11,04,594 together with penalty of ₹ 25,532 for giving permission. The respondent Company challenged the demand under a writ petition and the Single Judge, relying on Vali Pattabhirama Rao v. Sri Ramanuja Ginning and Rice Factory (P) Ltd. AIR 1984 AP 176, had allowed the writ petition of the respondent Company by quashing the demand for unearned increase and by directing the appellants L&DO to mutate/record the leasehold rights in the property from the name of the partnership firm to the name of the respondent Company. Based on the facts as above, answer the following: What are the changes in legal position of MSM partnership firm ?
Answer & Explanation:
A firm under the Indian Partnership Act, 1932 is not a juristic person and has no entity independent from that of its partners and is merely a compendious name for its partners. The property of a firm is the property of all its partners in proportion to their share in the partnership firm. The said partners of the partnership firm M/s Mahalaxmi Saw Mills converted the partnership firm into a private limited company and further provided in the Memorandum of Association of the Company that all the assets of the partnership firm stood vested in the Company by so doing, the property of the partners of the partnership firm M/s Mahalaxmi Saw Mills became the property of the Company.
Topics: Property Law
Related Questions in this Topic
- Zuben Developers Limited (Referred as 'Zuben Developers'), a real estate development company, permitted Urban Café Priva...
- Zuben Developers Limited (Referred as 'Zuben Developers'), a real estate development company, permitted Urban Café Priva...
- Whether the licence as defined under The Indian Easements Act, 1882, is transferable ?
- In a simple mortgage, the security for the debt is two-fold. Elucidate and cite case law, if any.
- Draft notice of Ejectment under section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. Assume facts, if required.