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

1937 Supreme(Mad) 99

STODART
A. P. M. Syed Ibrahim Sahib and Brother – Appellant
Versus
V. S. Gurulinga Aiyar – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Stodart, J.

1. The appeal is by the plaintiff. The plaintiff is a firm and the suit was against a debtor of the firm to recover money due on dealings. The suit was filed on 12th October, 1933, that is, it was presented into Court on that day and it was admitted to the file on 20th November, 1933. The Partnership Act IX of 1932 came into force on 1st October, 1932, except Section 69 which came into force according to Section 1(3) of the Act on 1st October, 1933. And the question for decision in this suit is whether, having regard to the provisions of Section 69 the suit is maintainable. Section 69(2) is:

No suit to enforce a right arising from a contract shall be instituted in any Court by or on behalf of a firm against any third party unless the firm is registered, and the persons suing are or have been shown in the Register of firms as partners in the firm.

2. This suit was instituted after 1st October, 1933, and the trial Court and the Court of first appeal have both held that it is not maintainable, because the plaintiff firm was not registered on 12th October, 1933.

3. Another point that arises in the suit is this. The plaintiff did actually get itself registered on 15th Ja


















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