(1.) THIS is an appeal by defendants 2 and 4 against the judgment of a learned single judge of this Court. Suit was one for realisation of repairing charges of a marine engine of a vessel. The 1st defendant is a partnership firm and defendants 2 to 4 are said to be the partners of the said firm. The firm requested the plaintiff to repair the marine engine on the assurance that the repairing charges would be paid as and when the work was completed. Plaintiff issued a bill on 1-8-1979 claiming rs. 44 ,000 /- as repairing charges with a request to settle the bill. Defendants declined to make payment and the plaintiff sent notice through lawyer on 19-1-1981 demanding payment of the amount with interest within a week. No payment was made. Hence the plaintiff filed the suit for realising the plaint amount.
(2.) THE 3rd defendant, in a separate written statement, admitted the plaint allegations and pleaded that it is because of the financial difficulties that the payment was not made. Defendants 2 and 4 filed a joint written statement stating that they ceased to be the partners of the 1st defendant firm with effect from 3-1-1978 and that they are not liable to pay the repairing charges. THE trial court, after considering the evidence in the case, found that the plaintiff has established its case and that the plaintiff is entitled to a decree and the suit was decreed.
(3.) COUNSEL for the appellants submitted that the partnership was not a registered one and not being a registered one, public notice is not required for effecting retirement of a partner. Sub-s. (3) of S. 32 of the Partnership Act is very clear as regards the liability of a retiring partner. Defendants 2 and 4 relied on Ext. B1, copy of the original of a deed of retirement of defendants 2 and 4. The learned single judge has considered the effect of Ext. B1 and ultimately found that ext. B1 cannot be safely relied on. So the very question of retirement itself is doubtful. Even if there is a clear case for defendants 2 and 4 regarding retirement, the question still remains whether the retirement was duly published as per the provisions of the Partnership Act. When once the fact of partners in a partnership is admitted, it is for the defendants to establish that they have retired from the partnership after giving notice and that too as required by the statute.