Sumitra Devi Anand (D) By Lrs vs Shanti Devi (D) By Lrs on 15 December, 2004
In the present case,
Shri Ramesh Chand was found not only in exclusive occupation of the premises by the neighbours
who appeared and testified in the Court but documents filed by Shri Ramesh Chand himself,
though filed by mistake, showed that he was the sole proprietor of the business being run in the
CM(M) 353/2007 Narain singh through Lrs & Ors. v. Shanti Devi through Lrs & Ors. Page 3 Of 4
shop. In the cross examination also he admitted that he was the only person doing business in
the shop. The evidence also revealed that the other brother was having separate business in Goa
as sole proprietor. Under these circumstances, the learned ARC rightly came to conclusion that it
was a case of sub-tenancy and not a case of partnership firm. This conclusion was re-examined
by learned ARCT and the learned ARCT also arrived at the same conclusion. A grave doubt was
casted by the fact that the original partnership deed produced in the Court did not bear stamp of
stamp vendor and the photocopy earlier produced did not tally with the original partnership deed
filed later on. That also shows that the partnership deed was a make-believe document created
subsequently after seeking leave to amend the written statement.