9911796707
TMI Blog1937 (8) TMI 13X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nership. The partnership business was, however, carried on by the plaintiff (who took the place of his deceased father), and the first defendant. This partnership carried on business until 1933 when the first defendant gave notice to the plaintiff dissolving the partnership. When the original partnership was formed, that is, the partnership between the plaintiff's father and the first defendant, it was agreed that they should share equally in the profits. They had each contributed a sum of ₹ 250 towards the capital. The plaintiff's father, however, was not satisfied with a division of profits on this basis, and on the 16th November, 1922, it was agreed between the plaintiff's father and the first defendant that the plainti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... int. 4. In the trial Court the plaintiff contended that he was Sahib entitled to have the accounts taken on the basis that he had a share of 9 1/2 annas on the ground that this had been expressly agreed. The first defendant similarly set up an express agreement to share equally. The learned Judge disbelieved the evidence of both the plaintiff and the first defendant and held that there was no express agreement at all. The parties had merely agreed to carry on the partnership business, the plaintiff taking the place of his deceased father and nothing being said about the shares. On this finding he held that the plaintiff was entitled to the share of his deceased father, and we consider that this decision is correct. 5. The lear ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... respect of the other adventures or undertakings, are the same as those in respect of the original adventures or undertakings. 6. There was no special contract between the parties when the plaintiff and the first defendant decided to continue the old business, but a change had occurred in the constitution of the firm. In these circumstances the Act contemplates that the rights and duties of the partners in the reconstituted; firm shall remain unchanged. There is no doubt that from 1922 up to the time of his death the plaintiff's father was entitled to a share of 9 1/2 annas, and we consider that in the circumstances of this case his son is entitled to a division on the same basis. 7. The appeal will therefore be dismissed w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
