High CourtsDivision Bench(1945) 01 MAD CK 0045

A.V. Sundaram Chettiar vs T.O. Ittimathu and Brothers by Proprietor, Ittimathu

Madras High Court · Decided on 15 January 1945 · Citation: AIR 1945 Mad 209 : (1945) 58 LW 170 : (1945) 1 MLJ 278

HON’BLE JUDGES
Somayya, J

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 187 words

Somayya, J.—The findings are accepted. The result is that the defendant is entitled to be given credit for Rs. 1,449-14-8 in addition to the

sums which are found in the plaintiff''s accounts. The lower Court has found that these payments are true. On the other side, the plaintiff is entitled

to get a sum of Rs. 1,372-3-9 in all for all the three periods covered by the suit. The final result is that nothing is owing to the plaintiff. It was

argued that the defendant''s firm is an unregistered firm and that therefore the defendants are not entitled to prefer the appeal. I cannot accept this

argument. Section 69 of the Partnership Act prohibits a suit by the members of an unregistered firm. If a suit is filed against certain persons who

carry on business without getting themselves registered and a decree is passed, they certainly ought to have the right of preferring an appeal and of

questioning the correctness of the decisions of the trial Court. I, therefore, reject this contention. The result is that the second appeal fails and is

dismissed with costs.

(No leave).