NARENDRA NATH Vs. MOHINDER NATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I.A. 9998/93 is for the appointment of Receiver with reference to the business M[s. Kidar Nath Mohinder Nath, defendant No. 4, a partnership firm Plaintiff and defendants 1 to 3 are brothers. The partnership consisted originally the Narendra Nath Vs. Sh. Mohider Nath plaintiff, defendants 1 to 3 and their mother Smt. Krishna Piara. The plaintiff and defendants 1 to 3 each had 15% share and the mother had 40% share in the partnership. It is stated by the learned counsel for the plaintiff that after the death of the mother the defendants 1 to 3 had taken the share of the mother on the basis of an alleged will, which has not been proved yet, and if it is taken that the mother died intestate the plaintiff would become entitled to 25% share.

(2.) I do not want to dilate on various allegations and counter allegations by the parties, inasmuch as in any event the plaintiff's 15% share in the partnership is admitted by defendants 1 to 3. The plaintiff is claiming dissolution of the partnership business. The contention of the learned counsel for defendants, inter-alia, is three fold; (1) that normally Receiver is not appointed with reference to the running business; (2) as even according to the plaintiff he disassociated himself from the partnership from 1985; and (3) he himself had written number of letters to the banks that he had disassociated himself from the partnership and. therefore, the plaintiff is not entitled to the appoint of Receiver.

(3.) The defendants 1 to 3 have also filed an application I.A.351/95 praying "In the interest of justice, it is, therefore, respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may He pleased to hold that the partnership firm is not at Will and the plaintiff has retired from the partnership firm. This Hon'ble Court may also be pleased to direct the payment of his share in accordance with the partnership deed." I am afraid that this cannot be acceded to when the question whether the partnership is at Will or whether the plaintiff has retired from the partnership can be decided only at the time of the trial of the case.