JUDGMENT

1. This is a defendant's, appeal against the decree of the learned Additional Subordinate Judge of Bara Banki, dated 10th March 1927, granting; the plaintiff-respondent a declaration that he is still a member of a certain firm. The decree refuses dissolution) of partnership. The plaintiff-respondent has riled a cross-objection against the refusal to dissolve partnership. The following facts are stated to show the nature of the dispute. George Perfect-owned a patent for the manufacture oft a certain type of mills for pressing sugarcane. He installed a factory close to Bahramghat in the Bara Banki District for the manufacture of these mills. Hia main business consisted in leasing these mills to cultivators during the cane pressing season, and the profits were-derived from the excess in rental of mills, over the working expenses of manufacture and upkeep. There were similar concerns in the neighbourhood one of which was owned by the plaintiff-respondent Kunj Behari Lal and another of which was owned by a man called Sheoratan. Perfect sold his business as a going concern to the plaintiff and five other persons. These five persons are Ajudhia Prasad, brother of the plaintiff, Nem Das an. Honorary Magistrate in the Bara Banki. District, Rajendra Singh, the son of Raghunath Singh a practising vakil in the Bara Banki District, Asghar Ali, an Honorary Magistrate in the Bara Bankii District and Sita Kant Saran the son of Kanhaiya Lai, a practising vakil in the Bara Banki District. The sale took: place in 1922 and the business was taken" over as a working concern on the 15th August 1922. On the 23rd September 1922, a deed of partnership (Ex. 2) was executed and registered at Bara Banki.. This deed contains a clause by which a majority of the partners were authorized to remove a partner from the firm if certain conditions were fufilled. It may be translated as follows:

Clause 12. If from the course of conduct of a partner it is proved to the rent of the partners, that his continuance is against the well being and good name of the firm and after hearing the objections of such partner it is decided by a majority of votes of the other partners that he should be expelled, then the other partners will have the power to expel him from the partnership on payment of the entire money which he has paid in the purchase.

2. According to the findings of the learned trial Judge Kunj Behari Lal, plaintiff-respondent, who, as has been already stated, had previously been engaged in a business similar to the business conducted by George Perfect, was with the consent of the other partners entrusted with the general management of the business from the 15th August 1922. An important portion of his duties was to distribute and let out the mills. In addition he attended operation at the factory at Bahramghat. The working manager in the Bahramghat factory was one Sydney George White, who had been employed in the same capacity by Perfect. White is a, Mechanical Engineer. His salary at the time that the partners took over the concern was Rs. 350 a month. There was trouble in the factory and just about the time that the partnership deed was registered the majority of the operatives went on strike. On the 24th September 1922, White resigned. Most of the operatives returned to work in two days but White and certain number did not return. White joined Sheoratan's firm and it appears that most of the men, who did not return, also joined Sbeoratan's firm. After this it is clear on the evidence that there was considerable friction amongst the partners. Under the terms of the deed of partnership a partner could substitute in the management a person delegated by himself; and it is in evidence that Rajendra Singh, who was a student, appointed his father Raghunath Singh to represent him; and Sita Kant Saran, also a student, appointed his father Kanhaiya Lal to represent him. On the 28th January 1923, Raghftnath Singh, who had become the dominant member amongst the pa