S. Padmanabhan, J.

1. Plaintiff is "M/s. Neldon Company", a partnership firm. The suit was filed by its Managing Partner, Mrs. Kunjumol Mathai, for realisation of the balance amount due under Ext. A1 pronote. One of the contentions was a vague plea of discharge. That is unsupported by any evidence and concurrently found against. The plea was not further pursued. Suit was dismissed and the decision was confirmed in appeal solely on the ground of maintainability for want of proof of conditions of S.69(2) of the Indian Partnership Act. That is the only moot point in this second appeal filed by the plaintiff.

2. In cases like this where there is a genuine claim which is not disputed, courts are expected to be more circumspect in dismissing the suit on such a plea especially when the contention itself is vague and evidently without bona fides. The purpose of the provision also should not be ignored. No plea as such was raised specifically-under S.69(2) of the Indian Partnership Act. Registration of the partnership was denied. But the firm is proved to be registered by production and proof of Ext. A2, which is the original acknowledgment of the registration of firm. The only other