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

1960 Supreme(Cal) 129

R.S.BACHAWAT, S.C.LAHIRI
PANNALAL PAUL – Appellant
Versus
PADMABATI PAUL – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
B.Banerji, B.C.Dutt, B.N.SEN, M.DUTTA

BACHAWAT, J.

( 1 ) THIS is an appeal from an order refusing to set aside an award. The appellants and the respondents carried on business in co-partnership in Homoeopathic medicines under the name and style of Paul and Co. , at No. 82, Clive Street, and another business in paper under the name and style of Hari Narayan Paul and Co. , at No. 103. Old China Bazar street. The appellants Pannalal Paul, Chunilal Paul and Lakshman Chandra Paul are the sons of one Hari Narayan Paul, deceased, and each of them had one-fourth share in the profits and losses of the two partnership businesses. The respondent Padmabati is the widow and the respondents Satya Charan Paul and Amar Nath Paul are the minor sons of another son of Hari Narayan Paul and they jointly had one-fourth share in the profits and losses of the two businesses. The respondents instituted a suit in this Court for dissolution and accounts of the two partnerships and for the realisation and distribution of the partnership assets and properties. The respondents also applied for appointment of a receiver. By an order dated January 31, 1956 all disputes in respect of the two partnerships mentioned in the plaint and in the petition f














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