CHINMOYEE BAXI Vs. ON THE DEATH OF RAJA KALYANI PROSAD SINGH DEO HIS HEIR AND LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE RAJA SANKARI PROSAD SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The subject matter of this appeal lies within a very limited compass, viz., whether the certified copy of a certain deed, the original of which is lost and untraced and which was insufficiently stamped, can be admitted in evidence and used by the plaintiff-appellant.

(2.) In order to understand how this controversy, which is a controversy on a pure question of law, has arisen between the parties it will be necessary to set out only the following facts about which there is no dispute. One Anandamoyee Sarkar who was mother of Chinmoyee Bakshi, plaintiff in the Trial Court and appellant of this appeal, was the owner of certain collieries, and as she had financial difficulties in running them, she took financial and other assistance from her daughter, the plaintiff, who set up plants and machineries in the collieries and was admitted as a partner of her mother in the colliery business. A deed of partnership was accordingly executed by the parties on the 11-12-1937. The partnership was subsequently dissolved by an agreement for dissolution of the partnership executed by the mother and the daughter on 13-3-1938.

(3.) The principal terms of this deed for dissolution of partnership were the following: First, in lieu of the dissolution Rs. 20,000/- was to be paid to Chinmoyee out of which Rs. 10,000/- was paid at the time of the execution of the deed of dissolution and the balance of Rs. 10,000/- was to be paid within three months from that date. Secondly, the colliery property of the mother was kept in charge as security for payment of the above sum of Rs. 10,000/-. It was further agreed between the parties that by payment of the sum of Rs. 10,000/- a hand-note which Anandamoyee had executed in favour of plaintiff's husband would become satisfied.