B.H.MARLAPALLE
Syed Hussain Assraf – Appellant
Versus
Dena Bank – Respondent
2. It was the case of the Plaintiff Nationalised Bank that defendant No.1 (since absconding) was its employer in its Head Office at Mumbai and defendant No.2 was his wife, whereas defendants No.3 & 4 are the residents of Goa and were carrying on a partnership business in the name and style of Messrs. Goa Ship Repairs (defendant No.5) with defendant No.2 as the 3rd partner. It was alleged that defendant No.2 was merely a benami partner in place of defendant No.1 and in fact it was at the instance of the defendant No.1 that she was described as a partner of defendant No.5 partnership firm which was registered under the Indian Partnership Act, 1932. Defendant No.2 did not have any independent source of income. Defendant No.1 had joined the services of the Bank in 1951 as a cler
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.