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

1975 Supreme(AP) 226

ALLADI KUPPUSWAMI, B.P.JEEVAN REDDY
P. Ananda Rao – Appellant
Versus
G. Rajarao – Respondent


ALLADI KUPPUSWAMI, J.

( 1 ) THE plaintiffs in O. S. 12/79, Sub-Court, Parvathipuram have filed this appeal against the judgment and decree dismissing their suit with costs. They are the sons of the Pydi Narasimha Apparao (referred to shortly in this judgment as Apparao who died and one Papainaidu entered into a partnership for the purpose of running a cinema hall at Palakonda. They started the business in 1947. At the time the licence for running the cinema was in the name of Apparao. On 1 2/02/1950 a formal partnership deed was executed. Each of the partners was to have a one-third share in the business. Once of the clauses in the deed was that if any of the partners desired to sell his share, he should sell it to the other two partners or any one of them for a reasonable price and it is not permissible for him to sell the share to others. Even if he effected such a sale, it would not be valid. The case of the plaintiffs as stated in the plaint was that in accordance with this provision Papainaidu sold his share in favour of the other partners on 16-5-1959 and thereafter their father Apparao and the first defendant continued the partnership each being entitled to half a share. On













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