T SUBRAMANIA AIYAR Vs. SHAW WALLACE AND CO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Messrs. Shaw Wallace and Co. merchants of Madras, sued the defendants-- appellants on a surety bond executed on the 11th February 1911 by the 1st defendant the father of defendants 2 and 3, all of them being members of a joint Hindu family. The 1st defendant who is a Brahmin land-holder of Mayavaram in the District of Tanjore wanted to do tanner s business but for social considerations, he liked to keep himself in the background and let the business be carried on in the name of a third person. The plaintiff company need on behalf of the tanners to ship their goods to England for sale charging them a commission on the sale proceeds, and in furtherance of such business they advanced moneys to tanners in order that they might buy skins and hides and tan them on the understanding that those goods should be sold in the London market through the plaintiff s agency. They charged interest on such advances and in order to secure their repayment they not only bargained for a lien on the skins which would be bought from time to time by the tanners but also obtained security on immoveable property of the tanners themselves and of other persons as sureties.

(2.) The first venture of the 1st defendant, Subramania Aiyar, was in August 1910. That business was carried on in the name of one Harisankar. It turned out to be unsuccessful and was closed in 1911. In connection with that business the plaintiff company have obtained a decree by consent against defendants 1 to 3 for the moneys advanced by them with interest. The business which has given rise to the present claim was started on 11th February 1911 in the name of Visvanatha Aiyar, & Co., the two partners constituting that firm being one Visvanatha Aiyer and the 2nd defendant.

(3.) One of the questions raised at the trial was whether the 2nd defendant was not a minor on the 11th February 1911. But it is found by the Subordinate judge that he was a major and that finding has not been challenged before us. Visvanatha Aiyar was the active partner of that firm and the 2nd defendant, though a major, had no experience in such business and the tannery was carried on, according to the evidence, entirely by Visvanatha Aiyar. Visvanatha Aiyar formally closed that business on 26th May 1911 and the plaintiffs claim, roughly speaking, is for a sum of Rs. 40,000 which was advanced from time to time to Visvanatha Aiyar & Co., under the agreement, Exhibit B, dated 11th February 1911. The surety-bond which is sought to be enforced in this suit (Exhibit B1) was executed on the same date and as part of the same transaction. Both the agreement with Visvanatha Aiyar & Co. and the surety-bond executed by the 1st defendant refer to each other.