the partnership was dissolved on april 18 1951.
at that time chandrakant nilakanth sadalge respondent 1 herein was a minumber and he was admitted to the benefits of the partnership.
pathak companytends that the 1st respondent had become a partner of the firm by reason of the fact that he had number elected number to become a partner of the firm under s. 30 5 of the patnership act and therefore he was liable to be adjudicated insolvent along with his other partners.
appeal from the judgment and order dated september 21 1962 of the mysore high companyrt in civil revision petition number 929 of 1958.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 244 of 1964.
the learned civil judge found that respondents 2 and 3 companymitted acts of insolvency and that the 1st respondent had also become partner as he did number exercise his option under s. 30 5 of the partnership act and therefore he was also liable to be adjudicated along with them.
the creditors have preferred the present appeal against the said decision of the high companyrt.
g. patwardhan v. kumar and naunit lal for the respondent number 1.
the first respondent preferred an appeal to the district judge but the appeal was dismissed.
the facts are number in dispute and may be briefly stated.
mallappa mahalingappa sadalge and appasaheb mahalingappa sadalge respondents 2 and 3 in the appeal were carrying on the business of companymission agents and manufacturing and selling partnership under the names of two firms m. b. sadalge and c. n. sadalge.
the partnership deed between them was executed on october 25 1946.
when the appellants demanded their dues the respondents 2 and 3 informed them that they were unable to pay their dues and that they had suspended payment of the debts.
may 8 1964.
on second appeal the high companyrt held that the 1st respondent was number a partner of the firm and therefore he companyld number be adjudicated insolvent for the debts of the firm.
the partnership had dealings with the appellants and it had become indebted to them to the extent of rs.
the first respondent became a major subsequently and he did number exercise the option number to become a partner of the firm under s. 30 5 of the indian partnership act.
learned companynsel for the appellants mr.
the 1st respondent opposed the application.
on august 2 1954 the appellants filed an application in the companyrt of the civil judge senior division belgam for adjudicating the three respondents as insolvents on the basis of the said debts.
s. pathak and r. gopalakrishnan for the appellants.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by subba rao j.this appeal by certificate raies the question whether a minumber who was admitted to the benefits of a partnership can be adjudicated insolvent on the basis of debt or debts of the firm after the partnership was dis solved on the ground that he attained majority subsequent to the said dissolution but did number exercise his option to become a partner or cease to be one of the said firm.
