TMI Blog1971 (2) TMI 125X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... apparently had some disputes with his co-plaintiffs and his name was struck out firm the record as plaintiff and added as the fifth defendant, The family to which the parties belong was joint and undivided, and for many years they had been carrying on business in salt. I need not go further back than 1909 when there was a family agreement, a part of which referred to a certain business in salt carried on at Bhaynder in which there were two outside partners, who are the second and the third defendants to this suit. The business was carried on in the name of Kessowji Dossa and the joint family had a share of elven annas, the second defendant had a share of three annas and the third defendant two annas. 3. In 1911, Gordhandas, the son of Ke ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... shops in certain proportions, It has now been argued by the first defendant's Counsel that these agreements of partnership were illegal and that, therefore, the plaintiffs cannot sue under them for a partnership account. 7. Under Section 11 of Bombay Act II of 1890, no salt shall be manufactured and no natural salt and, except under the provisions of Section 14, no salt-earth shall be excavated or collected or removed, otherwise than by the authority and subject to the terms and conditions of license to be granted by the Collector in this behalf. Section 47 provides a penalty for any one who, in contravention of the Act, or of any Rule or order made under the Act, or of any license or permit obtained under the Act, manufactures, remo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... condition. 11. In Ismailji Yusufali v. Raghunath Lachiram Marwadi 3 Ind. Cas. 779 : 33 B 636 : 11 Bom. L.R. 748. Yusufalli obtained from Government a lease of certain salt pans to manufacture salt under a license. One of the conditions of the lease was that the lessee should not sublet the salt pans without the written permission of the Collector. Without any such permission, however, Yusufalli sublet the salt pans to an outsider, who, as a security for the performance of the conditions of the sub-lease, deposited a sum of ₹ 1,000 with Yusufalli. On the expiration of the term, a suit was brought for the recovery of the deposit from the representative of Yusufalli, who denied the right to recover the deposit on the ground that it fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... obtained a license under the Abkari Act to sell country liquor. One of the conditions of the license was that the licensee should not sell, transfer to another person, or sub let his right to sell country liquor obtained under the license and he should not enter into any kabuliyat for the exercise of the said right, which, in the opinion of the Collector, is in the nature of a sub-lease. After obtaining the license, the defendant admitted a partner into the business, who afterwards brought a suit for an account of what was due on the partnership. A question having arisen as to whether the contract for partnership was forbidden by law and opposed to the policy and general tenor of the Act and, therefore, not enforceable in a Court of Law, i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aring in the profits, although the license was in the name of only one of their number. But even if the authorities did not object to that, it might still be raid that that would not prevent the admission of partners being illegal if that was the law. In so far as I conceded that that would be a correct argument, no useful purpose would be served by calling this evidence, whatever the attitude of the authorities may be. I prefer to decide the case, as far as I am concerned, on what I consider a far better ground, that the agreements of 1909 and 1911 do not infringe the conditions imposed upon Gordhandas by the various licenses which he held for the manufacture of salt. The evidence shows, apart from that, that Gordhandas was the man who act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in this suit. 16. The other issue was whether this Court bad jurisdiction to try the suit as regards the cause of action relating to the third defendant. The grounds for questioning the jurisdiction of the Court were that the third defendant did not sign the agreement, that he lived at Bhaynder and the business was carried on at Bhaynder. As a matter of fact, the agreement was signed in Bombay and the third defendant was present and attested it. As the agreement referred to other matters concerning the family, the outsider partners in the Bhaynder salt business did not execute it, but there is no doubt that the third defendant agreed to the terms in Bombay and that the agreement was made in Bombay and a part of the business was carried o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
