Skip to content


All Saints High School and anr. Vs. Director of School Education and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtSupreme Court of India
Decided On
Case NumberCivil Appeal No. 3315 of 1981
Judge
Reported in(1982)2SCC446
ActsConstitution Of India - Article 226
AppellantAll Saints High School and anr.
RespondentDirector of School Education and ors.
Excerpt:
- [ amarendra nath sen,; d.a. desai and;y.v. chandrachud, jj.] - constitution of india — article 226 — interim order — high court by its order awaiting disposal of appeal pending before director of education against dismissal of teachers — appellants before supreme court submitting that they intended to question before the high court jurisdiction of the director to entertain such appeal — order of the high court having been passed in open court before counsel of both the parties, it is not open to challenge before supreme court on the ground that it was passed under any misapprehension -- mr nariman says that the question of jurisdiction of the director to entertain the appeal can be disposed of by the high court in the writ petition pending before it and..........vasakattu account the balance of rs 21,791-6-11 is the profit of the tobacco business to be credited to the assets of the business. 13. the next item relates to bowringpet business. according to the appellant this business was subsidiary of the main partnership business and, therefore, all the profits from this business must be included in the account of the main partnership business. the suit partnership had been carrying on some business in partnership with persons who were not partners in the suit partnership. there is also a ledger page in the suit partnership accounts for the bowringpet businesses stated by the commissioner. i think that the 1st defendant is suppressing the accounts of this business because this business yielded considerable profits. the next item is a sum of rs.....
Judgment:

[ A.N. Ray and; I.D. Dua, JJ.] - Partnership Act, 1932 (9 of 1932) — Section 48 — Settlement of accounts after dissolution of firm — Amounts to be paid to each partner — Determination of — Liability for withdrawing more than the due amountSettlement of accounts after dissolution of firm — Assets — Stock-in-trade and stock-in-hand — Stock-in-trade taken into account in arriving profits each year -- The High Court disagreed with the trial court on certain matters. Defendant 1 preferred an appeal to the High Court against that decree. The High Court modified the trial court's decree in certain respects. The next item relates to tobacco account, also called Ondiputhur tobacco account. The next item is regarding a sum of Rs 18,111-12-8 towards Ondiputhur tobacco account. Deducting the above sum of Rs 18,451-12-0 in the Ondiputhur Vasakattu account the balance of Rs 21,791-6-11 is the profit of the tobacco business to be credited to the assets of the business. 13. The next item relates to Bowringpet business. According to the appellant this business was subsidiary of the main partnership business and, therefore, all the profits from this business must be included in the account of the main partnership business. The suit partnership had been carrying on some business in partnership with persons who were not partners in the suit partnership. There is also a ledger page in the suit partnership accounts for the Bowringpet businesses stated by the Commissioner. I think that the 1st defendant is suppressing the accounts of this business because this business yielded considerable profits. The next item is a sum of Rs 11,608-0-9, representing the profits got by the Bowringpet business and interest thereon.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //