DEVJI @ DEVIJI SHIVJI versus MAGANLAL R. ATHRANA & OTHERS

DEVJI @ DEVIJI SHIVJI versus MAGANLAL R. ATHRANA & OTHERS

The sub-lease was not executed in the name of the firm, nor was it intended by the parties to bind the firm. Therefore, only the partners who obtained the lease (respondents 4 and 5) are liable, and not the other partners or the firm itself.

Parties
Appellant: Devji @ Deviji Shivji; Respondent: Maganlal R. Athrana; Respondent: Other Respondents (Respondents Nos. 1-3, 5: Saurashtra Coal Concern, etc.)
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
01 April 1964
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court From Judgment and Decree of Patna High Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Liability of Partners, Binding Firm Under Partnership Act, Sub Lease to Partner, Benami Transactions
Partnership Law Liability of Partners Binding Firm Under Partnership Act Sub Lease to Partner Benami Transactions

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Devji @ Deviji Shivji

Appellant

Maganlal R. Athrana

Respondent

Other Respondents (Respondents Nos. 1-3, 5: Saurashtra Coal Concern, etc.)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court From Judgment and Decree of Patna High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether other partners are liable under a sub-lease granted to one partner when the sub-lease was not executed in the name of the firm nor intended to bind the firm under section 22 of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932.

Ratio Decidendi

The sub-lease was not executed in the name of the firm, nor was it intended by the parties to bind the firm. Therefore, only the partners who obtained the lease (respondents 4 and 5) are liable, and not the other partners or the firm itself.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Decree limited only against respondents 4 and 5.
  • Decree set aside as against respondents 1 to 3.