( 1 ) THE respondent filed the suit out of which this appeal arises. Claiming specific performance of a verbal agreement, possession of various articles of the business carried on under the name and style of ?murlidhar Agarwalla,? alternatively a decree for Rs. 20,500/- declaration that the sole owner of the business, and for various other reliefs. In this suit a judgment and preliminary decree was passed on February 3, 1971, for dissolution of the partnership, a receiver of the partnership assets was appointed and a decree for a sum of Rs. 1000/- as damages was also passed in favour of the respondent for wrongful trespass by the appellant. This appeal is directed against this judgment and decree.

( 2 ) THE respondent's case was that since prior to December 1, 1961 he and the appellant carried on business of a Flour Style of ?murlidhar Agarwalla?. In this partnership the respondent had a one third share and the appellant a two third share.

( 3 ) ON or about December 1, 1961 the parties entered into an agreement in writing, which provided that the respondent would exclusively manage and be in charge of the said business for a period of 5 years, with an option for a further 2 years. During this period the respondent would pay to the appellant a sum of Rs. 125/- per month but the latter would not be liable for any loss or expenses. The liabilities for income tax upto March 1, 1962, would be paid by the appellant and respondent in the proportion of two third and one third respectively. In terms of this agreement the respondent carried on the business for 7 years. According to the respondent before the expiry of the term of 7 years, on December 1, 1968, a verbal agreement was entered into between the parties under the terms of which, the appellant was to relinquish and transfer his right, title and interest in favour of the respondent, the consideration for such transfer being a sum of Rs. 17,500/ -. Of this amount Rs. 500/- was to be paid in the first instance and the balance of Rs. 17,000/- was to be kept in deposit with a common friend, until transfer of the tenancy from the name of the appellant to the respondent. On such transfer this sum of Rs. 17,000/- was to be withdrawn by the appellant from the third party. It is alleged in the plaint that the sum of Rs. 500/- was paid on November 4, 1968 and the sum of Rs. 17,000/- was deposited with one Banwarilal Agarwala.

( 4 ) PURSUANT to the agreement mentioned above the respondent took charge of the firm and claims to have invested various sums of money in the business.

( 5 ) ON December 2, 1968, the appellant is alleged to have wrongfully and illegally taken possession of the shop room including the stock-in-trade, cash money and other assets of the business. The respondent further alleged that the appellant was a trespasser and was in wrongful possession of the same business.

( 6 ) THE appellant's case as laid in the written statement is that he was the sole proprietor of the business. He denies that the respondent had a one-third or any other share in the business. According to him the respondent was appointed as manager of the business for a period of 7 years, under the terms of the agreement for transfer of the business for Rs. 17,500/- is denied by the appellant. The allegation of payment of Rs. 500/- and deposit of Rupees 17,000/- is also denied. On these pleadings various issues were framed and the trial Court came to the conclusion that the respondent's case regarding oral agreement for transfer of the business by the appellant was false, but that the respondent was a partner in business having a one-third share therein. On a consideration of the documentary evidence as also the oral testimony, the trial Court came to the conclusion that the elements which go to constitute a partnership were present in its case.

( 7 ) IT seems to me that the key to the whole situation is the agreement dated December 1, 1961, which is admitted by both parties. The case