A AKHAN Vs. AMEER KHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Plaintiffs 1 to 6 are the sons of Defendant 4. The age of the eldest i.e. plaintiff 1's age was 18 when the suit was filed in forma pauperis, on 9-10-46, by him and his five younger brothers who were all minors represented by their mother as next friend. Defendants 2 and 3 are also minors and sons of Defendant 1. The plaintiffs' case is that they, represented by their father and guardian defendant 4, entered into a partnership arrangement with defendants 1 to 3 for carrying on business under the name and style of the New Bombay Tailoring Co., under terms and conditions which were embodied in a registered deed of partnership dated 6-1-1944. Towards the capital of that partnership they invested Rs. 12,000/-, defendant 1, Rs. 1000/-and defendants 2 and 3 each Rs. 12,000/-making up in all Rs. 37,000/-. The partnership was to run for a period of 5 years with effect from 1-11-1943, from which date they had been carrying on the business, and they were entitled to a 5 annas share of the profits. Within a few months of the deed, defendant 1 picked up a quarrel with defendant 4 with selfish and ulterior motives and made it impossible for the partnership business to be carried on with any advantage to the other partners. The plaintiffs therefore had to issue a notice on 8-3-1945 terminating the partnership and bring their suit for a declaration that the partnership was dissolved with effect from 8-3-1945, for the taking of accounts, return of capital amount invested by them and for their share of profits.

(2.) Defendant 1 pleaded that neither the plaintiffs nor their father defendant 4 contributed anything towards the capital; that it had been agreed before the partnership commenced that defendant 1 should advance Rs. 6000/- on behalf of the six minor plaintiffs and that plaintiffs through their father should advance Rs. 6000/- making up Rs. 12,000/- in all as their contribution towards the capital, and that defendant 4 should work as a cutter and manage the concern. Contrary to this agreement, the plaintiffs and their father defendant 4 failed to pay the sum of Rs. 6000/-. Defendant 4 had misconducted himself and mismanaged the business and ultimately left it on 30-9-1944. and set up a similar rival business in the name of Khan & Co. though he had agreed to work for a period of 5 years. He had also not accounted for the stocks and outstanding collected by him and he had now set up his wife to bring the suit. There had been loss in the working of the business and not profits. He further pleaded that the plaintiffs were not entitled to the benefits of the partnership. The minor defendants 2 and 3 through their guardian ad litem also contested the plaintiff's claim.

(3.) The learned District Judge held that a partnership firm had come into being according to the terms of Exhibit A the partnership deed and had also been registered under the Partnership Act. He therefore passed a preliminary decree declaring that the partnership be dissolved with effect from 8-3-1945, and directing the taking of accounts with a view to ascertain the profits of the business and directing, the defendants 1 to 3 to pay the plaintiffs their share of capital of Rs. 12,000/-and costs of the suit. Defendants 1 to 3 have appealed.