B. K. SOMASEKHARA, J.

( 1 ) THE judgment and decree of the learned Addl. District Munsif, Ongole in SC No. 167 of 1995 are challenged. The petitioner is the plaintiff and the respondents are the defendants in the suit. The suit was filed for recovery of Rs. 2,547-80 ps. based on a pronote alleged to have been executed by the defendants. The defendants resisted the suit on several grounds. They were all rejected. The learned District Munsif accepted the case of the plaintiff in regard to the execution of suit pronote Ex. A1, passing of consideration and the defendants being liable to pay the amount and also accepted amount outstanding to be paid as pleaded. The excessive payments pleaded by the defendants was also rejected. All these things were covered by Points 1 and 2 which were determined in favour of the plaintiff! However, while determining point No. 3 viz. , whether the suit is not maintainable in view of non-compliance of Section 69 (2) of Indian Partnership Act, the learned District Munsif held in the negative. The reason being that according to sub-section (2) of Section 69 of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932 (Act No. IX of 1932), it is mandatory for the plaintiff not only

Click Here to Read the rest of this document