97 of 1960.
Veda Vyasa, R. K. Garg, D. P. Singh, Shiv Shastri and K. K. Jain, for the appellant in C. As.
It may be mentioned here that the suit has been decreed ex parte against both Kanshi Ram and Munna Lal.
2 in C. A. No.
94 96/60 and respondent No.
2 in C. A. No.
Seth Kanshi Ram is held liable to render accounts to the plaintiff and other defendants in respect of joint stores and lubricants in Exhibits I and 7.
It may also be mentioned that even in the appeals the winding up of the partnership business and the appointment of Mr. Kashi Nath as Commissioner for this purpose was number challenged by any party to the appeals.
On February 19,1951, he made an application to the companyrt for directing Kanshi Ram to give a lease of the mill to him for a period of five years companymencing from July 1, 1951.
95 of 60 and respondent No.
On July 16, 1948, Sheo Prasad transferred his 1/6th share to Banarsidas and since then Banarsidas has been getting the profits both in respect of his own share as well as in respect of that of Sheo Prasad.
Appeals from the judgment and order dated March 15, 1956, of the Allahabad High Court in First Appeals Nos.
This lease was renewed by the Government for the year 1945 46.
Any other relief which the plaintiff may be entitled against any or either of the defendants as the companyrt may deem fit to grant.
4 in C. A. No.
On April 2, 1954, the advocate appearing for Kundanlal stated that he did number wish to press this issue and that the only question left was of taking accounts.
Rameshwar Nath, S. N. Andley and P. L. Vohra, for the appellant in C. A. No.
Three appeals were preferred before the High Court against this decision.
97 of 1960 .
95 and 96/60 .
4 in C. A. No.
The partnership was to be at will and each of the brothers was to share all the profits and losses equally.
The judgment of the Court was delivered by MUDHOLKAR, j. These are appeals by certificates granted by the High Court of Allahabad under Art.
In the meanwhile, the District Magistrate, Bijnor took over the mill under the Defence of India Rules and appointed Kundanlal and his son to work the mill as agents of the U. P. Government for the year 1944 45.
94/60 .
96/60 .
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeals Nos.
Harbans Singh, for respondent No.
2 in C. A. No.
One was by Kanshi Ram, another by Banarsidas and the third was by Munnalal.
These appeals were heard together and were disposed of by a companymon judgment by the High Court on March 15, 1958.
94/60 and respondent No.
I and 3 in C. A. No.
December 17.
3 in C. A. No.
94 to 97 of 1960.
On Decemberl8,1950, an application which had been made for the appointment of a Receiver was dismissed on the ground that kanshi Ram who had been appointed as Receiver by the Lahore High Court companytinued to be the Receiver.
It may be appropriate to mention here that, issues in the suit instituted by Kundanlal were framed on December 7, 1951, and one of the important issues was whether the lease dated September 12, 1946, granted to Banarsidas was void ab initio or wits voidable and in either case what was its effect.
The Commissioner shall receive instructions from the companyrt from time to time.
94 and 97/60 respondent No.
172, 364, and 379 of 1954.
97/60 respondent No.
In September 1946, Banarsidas obtained possession of the mill.
P. Agarwal, for respondent No.
1 Seth Banarsi Das as 1/3rd and of defendants 2 to 4 1/6th each.
3 and 4 in C. A. No.
95/60 respondents Nos.
1 in C. As .
That a pendete lite interim Receiver may be appointed for the Seth Shiva Prasad Banarsi Das Sugar Mills, Bijnor.
After the disruption of the family the brothers decided to carry on the business of the said sugar mill as partners instead of as members of a joint Hindu Family.
On April 26 1951, one Mr. Mathur was appointed Receiver by the companyrt and in july 1 951, he granted a lease for five years to Kundanlal on certain terms which would be settled by the companyrt.
Valued at Rs.
The plaintiffs share is declared to be 1/6th of defendant No.
1 in C. As.
s. 3 and 4 in C. A. No.
In pursuance of the agreement between the parties the High Court appointed Kanshiram as Receiver in place of Mr. Mahajan as from April 5,1945.
It may be mentioned that this application was made at the suggestion of the District Magistrate Bijnor.
On July 30, 1949 , Banarsidas filed his written statement but numbere of the other dependents put in an appearance.
Valued at Rs.
In view of this companycession by the plaintiff, the Court decreed the suit in the following terms The suit is decreed for declaration that the S. B. Sugar Mills, Bijnor, stood dissolved with effect from 13th May, 1944.
On August 28,1956, the parties, except Devi Chand, made an application to the Court at Lahore praying that the Receiver be ordered to execute a lease in favour of Banarsidas for a period of five years.
Costs may be awarded to the plaintiff.
97/60 .
L. Gossain and Sohan Lal Pandhi for respondent No.
94160 respondents No.
5 number deceased, instituted a suit in the companyrt of the Sub ordinate judge, First Class, Lahore, for dissolution of partnership and rendition of accounts against Kundanlal and joined the other brothers as defendants to the suit, In the companyrse of that suit the companyrt, by its order dated August 3,1944, appointed one Mr. P.C.Mahajan, Pleader, as Receiver but as the parties were dissatisfied with the order the matter was taken up to the High Court in revision where they came to terms.
And it is ordered that Shri Kashi Nath who is appointed Commissioner for the purpose of winding up the affairs of the Mills, in this case, shall prepare accounts of the credits, properties and effects and stocks number belonging to the said mills and then submit the report to the companyrt.
The Subordinate Judge made an order in terms of the application.
That an account be taken from defendants I and 2 or any of them and decree be passed in favour of the plaintiff for the amount that may be found to be due to the plaintiff on account of his share in the assets and profits and sums of money in their possession.
After the report has been submitted and objections heard and decided, the companyrt would fix a date for the sale of the assets of the Mills.
On October 7,1948, the suit out of which these appeals arise was instituted by Kundanlal against all his brothers claiming the reliefs set out in para 29 of the plaint.
Amongst other properties the family owned a sugar mill at Bijnor in Uttar Pradesh called Sheo Prasad Banarsi das Sugar Mills.
Shri P. N. Mathur shall companytinue to be the receiver till further orders.
It may be mentioned that under an earlier arrangement Banarsidas had obtained a lease for a similar term which was due to expire on June 30, 1951.
96/60 and respondents Nos.
This judgment governs all these appeal.
It may be mentioned that during the pendency of this suit the appellant Banarsidas entered into an agreement with Devchand and Kanshi Ram whereunder he took over all their rights and interests in the said mill for a period of five years companymencing from July 1, 1951.
