Judgment

CHINNAPPA REDDY, J. : - The appeal arises out of a partnership action. The second defendant is the appellant. His express case was that he retired from the partnership with the consent of the other partners, that there was a dissolution of the firm consequent upon his retirement and that the suit so far as he was concerned was barred by limitation. The High Court has expressly found that the second defendant did retire from the partnership on January 19, 1948, that he was given a lorry and a certain sum at the time of his retirement from the partnership, that there was no final settlement of accounts of the firm at that time, nor was there a dissolution of the firm and that the suit for accounts even against the second defendant was within time. Shri M. K. Bhatt, learned counsel for the appellant, urged that the very circumstances on which the High Court relied to arrive at the conclusion that the second defendant had retired from the partnership were also, in the present case, sufficient to enable the court to come to the conclusion that there was a dissolution of the firm on January 19, 1948 when the second defendant retired from the partnership and consequently the suit