SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2006 Supreme(SC) 1068

B.P.SINGH, ALTAMAS KABIR
Purushottam – Appellant
Versus
Shivraj Fine Art Litho Works – Respondent


JUDGMENT

B.P. Singh, J. - In this appeal by special leave the plaintiffs are the appellants. Their suit against original defendant nos. 1 to 9 was decreed for the sum of Rs.8,92,815.14 by the Third Joint Civil Judge (Senior Division), Nagpur in Civil Suit No.52 of 1980. On appeal by original defendants 1 to 3, the High Court in First Appeal No.35 of 1988 by its impugned judgment and order of April 10, 1992 allowed the appeal and dismissed the suit holding that in view of the provisions of Section 69(2) of the Indian Partnership Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act), the suit was not maintainable, the plaintiff being an unregistered firm.

2. The facts of the case are not in dispute and they will be briefly noticed. Plaintiff No.1, Purushottam, carried on business as whole-sale paper merchant in the name and style of "Dinesh Paper Mart" as the sole proprietor of the concern. During this period he supplied goods to the defendant firm namely – Shivraj Fine Arts Litho Works, a firm registered under the Partnership Act. Defendants 2 to 9 were the partners of the said firm. In the year 1974, Special Civil Suit No.9 of 1974 was filed for dissolution of the defendant partnership firm





































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top