The Kathiawar Law Reports Volume 11; Containing the Decisions of Original and Appellate Cases of the Chief Court of Civil and Criminal Justice in Kathiawar and Appellate Decisions of the Bombay Government, and Also the Decisions of the Political Cases (Paperback)

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1902 Excerpt: ...L. R. XVIII. Bo. page 260, 5 K. L. R. 154, I. L. R. VII All. page 73, 16 W. R. 269, I. L. R. XII All. p. 416, X K. L. R. 316, I. L. R. XVI Bo. p. 608. The question at issue is very simple. It has been contended that the appellate decree of the Manager's court was a declaratory decree and therefore incapable of execution but as it was. a suit to set aside the order of attachment it contained a prayer for consequential relief. This point was decided in Motichand Jaichand v. Dadabhai Pestanji (11 Bo. H. Ct. Rep. page 186) where it was held that a suit which had as its object the relief of a house for attachment did seek consequential relief. The execution therefore of the Manager's decree and the release of the partnership property was quite according to law. It is difficult to understand how the Nyayadhish came to pass the order calling on the applicants to refund the money paid them by the widow. Their title to it was quite valid as they acquired it when the widow was in full ownership of it. In no case should they have been ordered to refund it without a hearing. The Lower Court's order is therefore set aside and the costs of the application should be borne by the opponent. 26th October, 1901. (Signed) C. A. Kincaid, Judicial Assistant. REVISIONAL CIVIL. Before C. A. Kincaid, Esq., J. C. S. Partnership--Contract Act ( IX of 1872 ) Sec. 253--Partner's right to take part in management of partnership business--Liability of partner for loss sustained. Two persons entered into a partnership, and one was sent by the other to buy certain goods. The latter sent his brother with him. The partner did not buy the goods at first, but, while returning, hearing rise in their price, showed his intention to buy them. The brother gave him a sum, but advised him to wire the ...