H C VEERA REDDY Vs. RATHILAL CHIMANLAL SHAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition arises out of an order passed by the Subordinate Judge, Adoni, dismissing a application I. A. No. 377 of 1976 in O. S. No. 44 of 1970. The application was filed under O. 20 R. 15 c. p. c. for passing a final decree in the suit which is one for dissolution of partnership.

(2.) The 5th defendant in the suit is the petitioner. The first respondent is the plaintiff in the suit. He filed the suit for rendition of accounts and for dissolution of partnership in respect of the firm run under the name and style of "Vishnu Cotton Ginning Pressing Factory," The parties entered into a compromise and a preliminary decree was passed on 22-4-1972 in accordance with the terms of the compromise. Under the terms of the compromise, the petitioner became the absolute and exclusive owner of the factory and other assets of the firm. He also became entitled to the outstanding dues to the firm and also any money that has been paid by him or become due and payable by the petitioner. The fifth clause in the compromise decree which is relevant for the purpose of this revision petition is as follows:-

(3.) The accounts of the firm show a debit entry of Rs. 18,522/- against the account of the 5th respondent 4th defendant. Under the preliminary compromise decree the petitioner is entitled to recover the amount due by the 5th respondent. At the time of dissolution of the firm, the firm was liable to pay electricity charges, municipal taxes et, Under cl. 5 of the compromise decree the income and expenditure shall have to be deducted from the amount shown as per their respective shares and the respective parties will have to draw the balance from the application for the passing of the final decree in terms of the cl. 5 of the preliminary decree against the 5th respondent for an amount of Rs. 25,227-50 and against respondents 7 and 8 for Rs. 1,111/-. The 5th respondent alone opposed the application was not maintainable in law, that the application was barred by the principals of res judicata since the application I. A. No. 215 of 1972 for the appointment of a Commissioner and for passing of the final decree was already dismissed and the same was also confirmed by the High Court in A. S. No. 501 of 1973. It was further pleaded that the amount due by the 5th respondent was paid to the first respondent personally in his personal account and in proof of discharge of the said debt he obtained a receipt from the 1st respondent and the same was also filed into Court in I. A. No. 215 of 1972. It was, therefore, contended that the petitioner was not entitled for a decree for Rs. 18,552/-