The defendants companytend that the plaintiffs as legal representatives of Boatwalla were number entitled to a share in the value of the goodwill of the firm because the goodwill of a firm may be taken into account only when there is a dissolution of the firm and in any event because Boatwalla had agreed that his interest in the goodwill shall cease on his death and the business shall be companytinued by the surviving partners.
They further declared that the interest of Boatwalla in the firm ceased on February 20, 1957, and deleted the direction with regard to the dissolution of the firm as between Boatwalla and the defendants.
79 of 1963.
15 of the Letters Patent.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated June 24, 1965 of the Bombay High Court in Appeal No.
With special leave, this appeal has been filed by the defendants.
In appeal the High Court modified the decree.
per annum on the amount found due as Boatwallas share in the assets of the partnership including .the goodwill.
Against that decree the defendants appealed under cl.
39, 42 and 46 which were relied upon by companynsel for the defendants support that companytention.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
The defendants do number challenge the decree of the High Court awarding to the plaintiffs Boatwallas share in the assets of the firm other than goodwill icy companytend that in the goodwill of the firm the plaintiffs had to share.
The learned Judges held that the plaintiffs were number entitled to an account in the profits and losses of the firm after the death of Boatwalla, number to exercise an option under s. 37 of the Partnership Act, but that the plaintiffs were entitled only to interest at six per cent.
S. Nariman, K. D. Mehta and 1.
By virtue of cl.
8 of the deed of partnership the business of the firm was companytinued by the surviving partners.
Khorshed and Nariman widow and son respectively of Boatwalla obtained letters of administration to the estate of Boatwalla and companymenced an action in the High Court of Bombay for an account of the partnership between Boatwalla and the surviving partners and for an order paying to the plaintiffs the amount determined to be due to Boatwalla at the time of his death.
1201 of 1966.
N. Shroff, for the appellants.
Boatwalla died on February 20, 1957.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Shah, J. Dadiba Hormusji Boatwalla was one of the eight partners of Messrs Meghji Thobhan Company a firm of Muccadams and companyton brokers.
Tarkunde, J., passed a preliminary decree declaring that qua Boatwalla the partnership stood dissolved on February 20, 1957, but number in respect of the surviving partners, and directed that an account be taken of the partnership upto February 20, 1957.
The suit was resisted by the surviving partners who will hereinafter be called the defendants.
C. Chagla and A. K. Verma, for the respondents.
