LIU YING PING Vs. LEON FANG AI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment and order of the High Court Division in F.A. No. 94 of 1979.

(2.) Leave was granted to consider the question namely upon the dissolution of the partnership whether the immovable property can be considered as the property of the individual partner and whether such property can be partitioned and further whether a separate registered deed was necessary to convey the share of the parties in the immovable property notwithstanding the agreement of settlement. Civil Petition No. 17 of 1984 was also filed by the plaintiff respondent. Since common question of facts and law are involved both of them are disposed of by this judgment.

(3.) Defendant is the appellant in CA. No. 112 of 1983. Respondent plaintiff filed Title Suit No. 231 of 1976 in the Court of Subordinate Judge, Dhaka 3rd Court for dissolution of partnership firm styled "Cafe China" for accounts and for partition of the suit property consisting of a plot of land and building at 75 Dilkusha Commercial Area, Dhaka. It was stated in the plaint that she and the defendant had been carrying on business as partner of a Chinese Hotel and Restaurant in the name and style "Cafe China" in a rented house at Segun Bagicha, Dhaka from 1.1.62 and subsequently a partnership deed was executed between the parties on 4.10.62 which was duly registered with the Registrar of Firm at Dhaka; that the share of the plaintiff and the defendant were 40 paisa and 60 paisa respectively and the partnership business bad-been making profit; that the firm got an allotment of a plot measuring 2638 sft at 75 Dilkusha Commercial Area from the D.I.T. and after construction of a building on the said plot the business was shifted therein and the plaintiff and defendant had been jointly possessing the suit property; that the defendant had been trying to raise a big amount of cash by mortgaging the suit property for his own benefit and on coming to know of the same the plaintiff sent a notice to the defendant, expressing her intention to dissolve the firm, amicably settle the account and to partition the suit property to which the defendant did not agree. Hence the suit.