1. feeling aggrieved by judgment and order dated 13.01.95 passed by Third Additional Judge to District Judge. Vidisha. in Civil suit No, 18/94. the plaintiffs/appellants have comeup in appeal to this Court and prayed for hearing of the suit on merits.

2, Appellants/plaintiffs had filed a suit before District Judge. Vidisha for declaration and mandatory injunction in respect of a partnership firm styled as" M/s Vidisha Auto Service" to declare that it is an exclusive dealership of the plaintiffs, According to the plaintiffs. defendant No, 2 Indian Oil Corporation granted agency of kerosene oil in Vidisha District to the plaintiffs in the name of Vidisha Auto Service for petrol, diesel and mobioil. Subsequently another retail outlet was opened in Dholkhedi which business was done in the sub-partnership with the name of Vidisha Auto Sales and Service. Initially, the partnership was constituted of two partners, namely; Ramswaroop Sharma, predecessor in title of the present plaintiffs. and defendant No. I i.e. defendant/respondent No. 1.

3. After about 14/15 years, there was some dispute between the partners and they mutually agreed to distribute assets of partnership and the deceased Ramswaroop Sharma was given the right of running the business in Vidisha and defendant No. 1 agreed to look after the business in Dholkhedi. This agreement did not subsist for long and again on 12.10.94. another arrangement was made and defendant No. 1 started business at Vidisha in the name of "Palod Auto Service". The deceased Ram Swaroop started business in the name of "Dholkhedi Auto Service" and the business at Basoda was done in the name of Basoda Auto Service. So far as the dealership of petrol, diesel and mobioil is concerned. the matter was settled mutually as above. However, in relation to business of Kerosene Oil, defendant No. 1 renounced his rights in the kerosene business after taking consideration as agreed and the kerosene business was entrusted solely to deceased Ramswaroop Sharma. The agreement in relation to kerosene business was adopted in 1980 and the same continued upto November, 1983,

4. As per the arrangement entered in the year 1980, the kerosene was received from defendant No.2 on the basis of an indent signed by the deceased Ramswaroop Sharma and defendant No.1. However, defendant No.1 did not abide by this arrangement and he started raising objection. Ultimately, the Collector suspended the kerosene licence and as from 27.9.87. late Ramswaroop Sharma was accepted sole owner of the business run in the name of Vidisha Auto Service and it was also agreed that Ramswaroop Sharma will be fully entitled for doing the business of kerosene. This arrangement was also agreed by the defendant No.2 Indian Oil Corporation Limited. Ramswaroop Sharma died on 6.12.1989 and this thing was utilised by defendant No. 1 for raising objection and claiming the share in the business of kerosene. The defendant No.2 in collusion with defendant No. 1 also raised objection on the ground that defendant No. 1 alone remains the sole surviving partner of Vidisha Auto Service after the death of Ramswaroop Sharma.

5. On 27.6.1989. respondent/defendant No. 1 voluntarily agreed to keep himself away from the partnership firm Vidisha Auto Service and consented Ramswaroop Sharma to carryon the business of this firm in his exclusive rights. Ramswaroop Sharma thereafter reconstructed the said firm Vidisha Auto Service by naming his son plaintiff Ramsahay Sharma in place of respondent-defendant No. 1. Before Ramswaroop Sharma could have completed the formalities to get normal kerosene supply from Indian Oil Corporation, he expired on 6.12.1989 and thereafter Ram Sahay Sharma inducted his mother Shanti Devi as a partner in the said firm. However, no formal recognition could be obtained because of the objections raised on behalf of respondent/defendants which necessitated the filing of the suit as referred hereinabove.

6. Respodent/dendant No. I Radhey Shyam Palod