Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1958 (12) TMI 46

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... raman Chettiar died first, i.e., on 13-4-1926 leaving his widow, the respondent as his sole heir. The business, however, continued. The respondent thereupon stepped into the shoes of her deceased husband and carried on business with Viswanathan Chettiar. Ex. B. 70 is a deed of partnership dated 10-12-1941, entered into between the respondent and Viswanathan Chettiar, the defendant's adoptive father. There is no doubt that the partnership between them was from the date of death of Muthuraman Chettiar in continuation of the old business and this document was only a record of the terms thereof for reducing the rate of income-tax. On 19-11-1943 Viswanathan Chettiar died. About one year prior to his death the appellant was adopted to him. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e death of her husband, Muthuraman, that is prior to 13-4-1926, but that she would have a right to the taking of the accounts from 13-4-1926. The lower court made it also clear that while taking accounts it may be open to the parties to look into the old accounts i.e., accounts prior to 13-4-1920 for the purpose of ascertaining the capital contribution. It accordingly passed a preliminary decree for taking accounts of the dissolved partnership on the lines indicated by it. The defendant has filed the present appeal against that decree. 4. Mr. Jagadisa Iyer, the learned counsel for the appellant, did not contest the findings of the lower court to matters other than its direction in regard to the accounts. His contention was that on the dea .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e is subject to any contract to the contrary between the partners. If the intention of the partners was that the death of one of them was not to result in the dissolution of the firm, such an agreement could be given effect to. In such cases the partnership as between the surviving partners will continue. There may also be cases where under the agreement of the deceased partner between the original partners the legal representatives of the deceased partner may be entitled to join in the firm in the shoes of the deceased partner. But the application of this rule will be difficult in the case of a firm composed only of two partners. In that case if one of the partners died, there will not be any partnership existing to which the legal repre .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... l representatives, as partnership was not a matter of status, but of contract. 7. Mr. T. Venkatadri, the learned advocate for the respondent, contends that the view of the learned Judge in , should not be accepted, and that the correct view is that contained in ILR 1946 AH 309: (AIR 1946 All 259). In support of that contention, he referred me to the observation contained in Sokkanadha Vannimundar v. Sokkanadha Vannimundar, ILR 28 Mad 344. In that case a sub-lease of a fishery right was held by the plaintiff along with one Kandasami. Kandasami died and there was evidence that afterwards, the plaintiff and the members of Kandaswami's family were participating in litigation in connection with the business. The learned Judges observed at .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... liable on accounts being taken from the commencement of the old partnership or from the date of the last accounting as the case may be. This may be viewed as an agreement between the surviving partner and the heir of the old partner to treat the new partnership between them as a continuation of the old. Another way in which the matter can be looked at is that although the partnership was dissolved by the death of one of the partners the entire assets of the old firm which would include the original assets as well as the subsequent profits or losses would be taken to be the assets of the new firm. In that view there will be no practical difference by treating the firm as new one or treating it as a continuation of the old firm. For in eith .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates