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

1924 Supreme(Mad) 566

RAMESAM
Ramaswami Nathan – Appellant
Versus
M. P. M. Muthiah Chetti – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Ramesam, J.

1. The facts of this appeal may be briefly stated:

2. The plaintiff, the first defendants father and two others carried on a partnership business at Zanzibar. O.S. No. 143 of 1909 was filed in the Subordinate Court of Madura East for its dissolution. In that, suit, the present plaintiff was the 5th plaintiff and the father of the present 1st defendant was the 1st defendant. A preliminary decree was passed on 27th October, 1909, and a Commissioner was appointed. The Temporary Subordinate Court of Ramnad, to whose file the suit was then transferred, confirmed the report of the Commissioner. Paragraph 6 of the order confirming the report runs as follows:

It is therefore ordered that the 1st defendant do forthwith pay into Court the sum of Rs. 2.611-6-3 being the amount found due to the partnership by him, that, in default of such payment, the 5th plaintiff is appointed Receiver to realise and collect the said amount with power to bring and defend suits in his own name, etc. (see Ex. D).

3. The final decree (Ex. E.) of the Subordinate Court was passed on 14th October, 1911. It says, that out of the amount collected by the 5th plaintiff as Receiver in realising the only







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