REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

Y.VENKANNA CHOWDRY (DIED) Appellant

V/S

G.LAKSHMIDEVAMMA Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

MCKELLAR V. WALLAGE [REFERRED TO]
DWARKA DOSS V. JANKI DOSS [REFERRED TO]
LAMBERT V. STILL [REFERRED TO]
MATHURA DATT V. PREM BALLABH [REFERRED TO]
GETHING V. KEIGHLEY [REFERRED TO]
WILLIAMSON V. BARBOUR [REFERRED TO]
SUDARSANAM MAISTRI V. NARAS IMHULU MAISTRI [REFERRED TO]
THA HUYIN V. MAH THEIN MYAH [REFERRED TO]
GOKUL KRISHNA DAS V. SHASHI MUKHI DASI [REFERRED TO]
HINGU MIAN V. HERAMBA CHANDRA [REFERRED TO]
JETHMAL BAGMAN V. S. BHAGCHAND [REFERRED TO]
JUGAL KISHORE PALIWAL V. SAT JIT SINGH [REFERRED TO]
LOYAL TEXTILE MILLS LTD. V. ALLENBERG COTTON CO. LTD. [REFERRED TO]
JUGAL KISHORE PALIWAL V. SAT JIT SINGH [REFERRED TO]
RAMASWAMI IYER V. GHANAMANI NACHTAR [REFERRED TO]
AMIR CHAND V. JAWAHIR MAL [REFERRED TO]
GHUMAMMAL V. PAPURBAI [REFERRED TO]
GAJENDRA SHAH V. SHANKER BUX [REFERRED TO]
C.R.R. GOWDER V. C. P. NANJAPPA [REFERRED TO]
CHENNURU GAVARARAJU CHETTY VS. CHENNURU SITARAMAMURTHY CHETTY [REFERRED TO]
P C PURUSHOTHAMA REDDIAR VS. S PERUMAL [REFERRED TO]
SHAH BABULAL KHIMJI VS. JAYABEN D KANIA [REFERRED TO]
JUGAL KISHORE PALIWAL VS. S SAT JIT SINGH [REFERRED TO]
MATHURA DATT BHATT VS. PREM BALLABH KHULBA [REFERRED TO]
SARAT KUMAR PAUL VS. SUDHIR KUMAR PAUL [REFERRED TO]
RADHIKA KONEL PAREKH VS. KONEL PAREKH [REFERRED TO]
DEBI PARSHAD VS. JAI RAM DASS [REFERRED TO]
HAGAMI LAL RAM PRASAD VS. BHURALAL RAM NARAIN [REFERRED TO]
BHAGWAN BAKHSH SINGH VS. JOSHI DAMODARJI [REFERRED TO]
AHMED MUSAJI SALEJI VS. HASHIM EBRAHIM SALEJI [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Managing Partner (judgment-debtor) in a proceeding for rendition of accounts, has preferred this appeal against the judgment by Padmanabhan, J. dated 13-6-1979.

(2.) Originally the plaintiffs and the defendants entered into a partnership on 5-11-1956 under the name and style of Sambhu Films, all partners agreeing to share the profit and loss of the business. The capital of the firm of Rs. 2,20,000/- was divided into 220 shares of Rs. 1,000/- each and the first defendant /appellant was appointed as the Managing Partner under the deed. The Firm produced two motion pictures, one in Telugu and another in Tamil. Particularly relying upon two clauses of the partnership deed clauses (9) and (10) and alleging violation thereof, the plaintiffs stated in the plaint as follows :-

(3.) Alleging further that as a result of the investigation and enquiry, the plaintiffs were able to obtain the aforesaid particulars and they reserved their right to amend the plaint by including further transactions entered into by the first defendant with partnership funds in case such details came to their knowledge, and stating in particular that the first defendant was acting in a fiduciary capacity to other partners and was bound in such fiduciary capacity to protect the interest of all the partners of the Firm, the plaintiffs maintained that the first defendant had gained for himself a pecuniary advantage by withdrawing partnership funds and utilising the same in purchase of property and of commencing of business such as 'brick kiln' in one of the items of properties purchased in the name of himself, his wife, son, and his nominee. There has been a further allegation in the plaint, which however, only added to the allegations of misconduct on the part of the first defendant as the Managing Partner of the Firm for the purpose of the suit for accounting.

Click here to view full judgment.

Y VENKANNA CHOWDRY DIED Vs. G LAKSHMIDEVAMMA

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address