Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
C.KUMARAPPAN
M.S.Sivasankar – Appellant
Versus
N.Kavitha – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
C. KUMARAPPAN, J.
1. The defendants 1, 2 and 5 are the appellants herein. The first respondent herein is the plaintiff before the Trial Court and the defendants 3 and 4 are the respondents 2 and 3 herein.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties will be referred to according to their litigative status before the Trial Court.
3. The brief facts, which give rise to the instant Second Appeal is that the plaintiff is the daughter of one Savithri. The 1st and 2nd defendants' father Selvamani, who is the 3rd defendant herein and deceased Savithri and the 4th defendant are the brother and sister and children of one Muthusami Gounder. The said Muthusami Gounder and the defendants 1 and 2 together constituted a firm in the name and style of M/s.Mani Transport. The firm was constituted for the purpose of plying buses. The partnership firm was serendipitously and curiously constituted on 01.04.2005 (April 1st) and registered under the PARTNERSHIP ACT . The said partnership firm is arrayed as 5th defendant in the suit. In the said partnership firm, Muthusami Gounder had 40% share, and the defendants 1 and 2 had share of 30% each.
4. While so, the said Muthusami Gounder died on 23.09
The court affirmed that a valid Will cannot be superseded by a partnership deed regarding accounts due to a deceased partner, ensuring the beneficiaries' rights to profits.
A suit for accounts of a dissolved partnership and a share in the immovable properties of the partnership is barred by limitation under Article 106 of the Limitation Act, 1908.
Point of law: Arbitration - Arbitral Award - Interference by Court - Scope of powers of Appellate Court under Section 37 of Arbitration Act are more limited than limited powers of the Court hearing t....
Partners are entitled to transparent bookkeeping; discrepancies in financial accounts justify judicial intervention for the rendition of accounts.
Settlement of accounts – Outgoing Partner would have right to seek for accounts and a share in profits which might be derived from his share in assets of firm.
The existence of a registered partnership deed governs the relationship between parties, rendering claims for partition of joint family properties unmaintainable when no evidence of joint family owne....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of mutual agreement for partnership dissolution and the significance of partnership deeds in determining the intention of the pa....
Dissolution of Partnership Firm – Existence of contract is a sine-qua-non for relationship of partnership – Decision based on adjustment of equities between parties will be far more beneficial than r....
(1) Partition – Once disruption of joint family status takes place, coparceners cease to hold property as joint tenants but they hold as tenants-in-common.(2) Production of additional evidence – It i....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
