Law:

Section:

Article 226 of the Constitution of India - Writ - Returns were filed in respect of certain business in status of HUF for assessment year 1963-64 and in the status of firm for subsequent two years - Thereafter, consequent upon certain litigation, a receiver was appointed for firm by Court - ITO made ex parte assessment for aforesaid years under section 144 in the status of an AOP on an income higher than that returned - Notices under section 143(2), assessment orders and demand notices were served upon receiver and not upon partner of firms - In recovery proceedings, house belonging to one of partners was attached originally vide order dated 20-2-1969 -Affected partner and/or other affected persons adopted various devices to stall attachment till December 1986 - Thereafter petitioner, a partner of the said firm, filed instant writ petition seeking quashing of ex parte assessment orders and consequent recovery proceedings on ground that notices under section 143(2), assessment orders and demand notices were not served on partners of firm, though admittedly these were served on receiver - Record showed that partners were fully aware of assessment and related proceedings but took no steps right from beginning to undo assessment, though they adopted various devices to defeat recovery proceedings - Whether petitioner deserved any relief under article 226 - Held, no Facts One L was engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of pan masala. He died on 23-3-1959 leaving behind his wife B and his sons C, M and K (the petitioner). On 24-3-1959, C formed a partnership comprising himself, his two sons, M and K and his mother B. In 1961, K, M and B started separate business in the status of a HUF and later in the name of the firm Badshah Pasahd Karyalaya constituted under the partnership deed dated 11-10-1962 comprising of K, M and B as partners. Since C also carried on separate business in the same name and style of Badshah Pasand Karyalaya, he filed a suit in civil court against K, M and B for infringement of trade mark of his business and claimed mandatory injunction against the partners restraining them from carrying on the business in the name and style in which the…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492