42174 and 60 paises at 6 per annum from November 28, 1958 until payment.
During the pendency of the appeal the defendant died and his legal representatives were brought on record.
Counsel on both sides are agreed that we should allow interest on 27035 dollars and 50 cents at 6 per annum from January 7, 1924 upto November 28, 1958 and further interest at 6 per annum from November 28, 1958 until payment.
88292 and 49 paises for interest upto November 28, 1958 aggregating to Rs.
Under this companypromise they agreed that out of the aforesaid original 5 shares in the Shop Leong Watt Hin Rubber Estate 21/2 shares would belong to the P.M.S. Firm then represented by the defendant as the managing partner and the remaining 21/2 shares would belong to Shanmugham.
the last head with 12500 dollars and are entitled to be credited with 18000 dollars and 3000 dollars.
The High Court held that the arrangement dated July 16, 1915 was valid and was number vitiated by fraud.
During the pendency of the suit Shanmugham was adjudicated an insolvent and thereupon the Official Receiver of Ramanathapuram L12Sup.
From the material on the record it is number possible to find out the precise dates of receipt of the dividends.
After protracted proceedings which is number necessary to mention number, the Subordinate Judge granted the declarations claimed by Shanmugham and passed a preliminary decree for accounts.
The decree passed by the High Court is reduced to Rs.
Shanmugham alleged that the transactions of July 16, 1915 and January 7, 1924 were vitiated by fraud, and fraudulent companycealment.
42174 and 60 paises for principal and Rs.
Under this companypromise the defendant agreed and undertook to recover the 5 shares and to account to Shanmugham for the 2 1/2 shares belonging to him and the income and the dividends arising therefrom.
705 of 1965.
Directions II, III, IV, V and VI incorporated in the High Court decree are affirmed.
On January 7, 1924 while Shanmugham and the defendant were at Mallacca they entered into an agreement which is recorded in Exhibit B 2.
The present appeal has been preferred by the defendants after obtaining a certificate from the High Court.
The High Court also held that the suit was number barred by limitation.
The Subordinate Judge accepted the plaintiffs companytentions and held that both the transactions of July 16, 1915 and January 7, 1924 were vitiated by fraud and were liable to be set aside.
Appeal from the judgment and decree dated November 28, 1958 of the Madras High Court in Appeal No.
The defendant filed an appeal in the High Court of Madras.
With regard to the arrangement dated January 7, 1924 the High Court agreed with the Trial Court and held that the transaction was vitiated by fraud and that the defendant was liable to account for 21/2 shares in the Rubber Estate and dividends amounting to 35535 dollars and 50 cents with interest thereon.
156 per 100 dollars.
The agreed rate of exchange is Rs.
42174 and 60 paises from November 28, 1958 until payment.
The result is that the defendants are liable to pay 35535 dollars 50 cents minus 8500 dollars, that is to say, 27035 dollars 50 cents and interest thereon at 6 per annum.
Thus under the last head the defandants are entitled to a net credit of 8500 dollars.
The appeal is allowed in part.
130467 with interest at 6 per annum on Rs.
C.I/68 14 was added as the 2nd plaintiff.
Counsel on both sides have worked out the figures and on that basis the defendants are liable to pay Rs.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
On July 16, 1915 while both Shanmugham and the defendant were at Malacca they entered into a companypromise agreement which is evidenced by Exhibits A 177 and A 178.
130467 and interest on Rs.
On September 14, 1927 Shanmugham instituted a suit against the defendant in the companyrt of the Subordinate Judge, Devakottai, asking for a declaration that he was entitled to the original 5 shares in the Rubber Estate, that Exhibitis A 177, A 178 and B 2 were void, and for accounts and companysequential reliefs.
756 of 1964.
R. Srinivasan and R. Kopalakrishnan, for respondent No.
S.K. Sastri and R. Thiagarajan, for the appellants.
In August 1913 the attorney of Subramanians widow took out letters of administration to his estate.
On December 9, 1912 Subramanian died leaving behind him his widow and his son the plaintiff Shanmugham.
Under this agreement Shanmugham transferred his remaining 21/2 shares in the Rubber Estate to the defendant on receipt of 18000 dollars as companysideration.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Bachawat, J. Subramanian Chettiar was the owner of 5 original shares subsequently represented by 1250, shares in the Chop Leong Watt Thin Rubber Estate in Malacca.
Subramarnian, the defendant and certain others were partners in the P.M.S. Firm at Malacca.
