Narayana Chetti Vs. Lakshmana Chetti - Court Judgment
|Judge||Arthur J.H. Collins, C.J. and ;Shephard, J.|
|Cases Referred||Lukmidas Khimji v. Purshotam Haridas I.L.R.|
contract act - act ix of 1872, section 43--joint promissors--suit for money against person currying on business of a dissolved partnership--objection taken on ground of non-joinder. - 1. according to the law declared in the contract act, section 43, especially when taken with section 29 of the civil procedure code, it is clear that it is not incumbent on a person dealing with partners to make them all defendants. he is at liberty to sue any one partner as he may choose, lukmidas khimji v. purshotam haridas i.l.r. 6 bom. 700.2. the petition must therefore be dismissed with costs.
1. According to the law declared in the Contract Act, Section 43, especially when taken with Section 29 of the Civil Procedure Code, it is clear that it is not incumbent on a person dealing with partners to make them all defendants. He is at liberty to sue any one partner as he may choose, Lukmidas Khimji v. Purshotam Haridas I.L.R. 6 Bom. 700.
2. The petition must therefore be dismissed with costs.