Bombay High Court
Bhanudas Mallikarjun Kdane
Versus
Mahendra Amritlal alias Anamlal Mehta
Decided On:

Headnote:Section 69-provision under-Whether can be attracted in instant case?

       Held, the only question which arises for consideration of the Court on issue No. 1 to 3 deserve to be upheld or deserve to be set aside. In light of the above discussion it is held that the view taken by the trial Court is erroneous. Court accepts the testimony of the Plaintiff No. 2 and hold that the business was carried on by the 3 brother in the name of Janseva Motor Goods Transport as a proprietory concern of 3 brothers i.e. the plaintiffs and there was no agreement of partnership between the parties within the meaning of the expression partnership as used in the Indian Partnership Act, 1932. In view of the above, it is held that Section 69 of the Indian Partnership Act was no at all attracted to the facts of the case.

       For Citation : 1995 (2) Mah LR 139