Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 12 (0.22 seconds)Addanki Narayanappa & Anr vs Bhaskara Krishtappa And 13 Ors on 21 January, 1966
In Narayanappa v. Bhaskara Krishnappa, the Supreme Court, while dealing with the provisions of the Partnership Act held:
Karbalai Begum vs Mohd. Sayeed And Anr on 7 October, 1980
In this connection, it is pertinent to notice the observations made by the Supreme Court Karbali Begum v. Mohd. Sayeed, AIR 1981 SC 76, which run thus:
Sudarsanam Maistri vs Narasimhulu Maistei And Anr. on 20 September, 1901
In the decision, Sundarsanam Maistri's case (4 supra), the suit was brought by the plaintiff for taking an account of the property alleged to have been jointly acquired by the plaintiff and the first defendant therein as undivided brothers, for ascertaining the respective shares of the plaintiff and the first defendant therein and for a decree awarding to him his share in such property. In that case, the existence of partnership itself was in doubt and the court had to decide on the basis of evidence available as to whether there is partnership between the plaintiff and the first defendant. Therefore, that decision is distinguishable on the facts. In the present case on hand, admittedly, there was partnership in existence and that partnership had dissolved and admittedly there are undivided properties which are the assets of the dissolved firm.