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

1999 Supreme(Guj) 508

ANIL R.DAVE
RAJNIKANT HASMUKHLAL GOLWALA – Appellant
Versus
NATRAJ THEATRE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: AJAY MEHTA, ARUN H.MEHTA, M.J.THAKUR

A. R. DAVE, J.

( 1 ) THE appellants are some of the original defendants who have challenged the validity of the order passed below Ex. 5 dated 29/05/1999 in Special Civil Suit No. 19 of 1999 filed in the court of Civil Judge (S. D) at Navsari.

( 2 ) THE relevant facts in a nutshell giving rise to the present litigation are as under:-

( 3 ) FOR the sake of convenience, parties to the litigation have been described as shown in the trial court. Plaintiff No. 1 is M/s. Natraj Theatre which is a partnership firm. Plaintiffs Nos. 2 to 6 and defendants Nos. 1 to 11 are partners of the said firm. It is not in dispute that plaintiffs Nos. 2 to 6 have assigned their rights as partners of the said firm to plaintiffs Nos. 7 and 8 whereas defendants Nos. 1 to 11 have assigned or sold their rights as partners of the said firm to defendant No. 12. At an earlier occasion plaintiffs Nos. 2 to 6 had agreed to sell or assign their rights to defendant No. 12 but subsequently no formal conveyance deed was executed and finally plaintiffs Nos. 2 to 6 had assigned their rights as partners to plaintiffs Nos. 7 and 8. Defendant No. 13 is an agent of defendant No. 12 who appears to be doing business on behalf









































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