1 1 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. FIRST APPEAL NO.997 OF 1996. FIRST APPEAL NO.997 OF 1996. FIRST APPEAL NO.997 OF 1996. Kamlesh Awadhnarayan & ors. : Appellants. versus Sakalnarayansingh Sitlaprasad Singh & ors. : Respondents. ALONG WITH ALONG WITH ALONG WITH FIRST APPEAL NO.1001 OF 1996 FIRST APPEAL NO.1001 OF 1996 FIRST APPEAL NO.1001 OF 1996 Kamlesh s/o. Awadhnarayan & ors.: Appellants versus Mahendrakumar Arjunsingh & ors. : Respondents. Mr.Suresh Gole i/by Gole & Co. for the appellants. Mr.U.S.R. Singh for the Respondents. CORAM : D.G.DESHPANDE,J. CORAM : D.G.DESHPANDE,J. CORAM : D.G.DESHPANDE,J. DATED : 27th January 2005. DATED : 27th January 2005. DATED : 27th January 2005. 2 2 2 ORAL ORDER ORAL ORDER ORAL ORDER 1. These two appeals arise out of two different decrees passed in two different Suits wherein the evidence was common. Kamlesh s/o. Awadhnarayan filed a suit for specific performance of agreement. His suit was dismissed. Sakalnarayansingh Sitlaprasad Singh filed a suit on the basis of partnership deed. That suit was decreed by the trial Court. Kamlesh, whose suit was dismissed and against whom a decree was passed as stated above on the basis of partnership has filed both these appeals. The dispute between the parties is in respect two business houses i.e. "Baijnath Cold Drink House" and "Fort Cold Drink Depot". 2. After hearing both the advocates at length I pass the following order by consent :- :ORDER: :ORDER: :ORDER: The decree passed in the suit filed on the basis of partnership is maintained. The partnership deed is to be given 3 3 3 effect to. While dismissing the suit filed by Kamlesh, the trial Court has directed Kamlesh to hand over possession of the premises to the defendants, who are the respondents before me, that order is modified and it is directed that Kamlesh will hand over possession of the business premises to the respondents i.e. the next partner who was entitled to run the business Baijnath Cold Drink House as per partnership. It is clarified that four members of the partnership will run the business for one year each, in the same order in which their names are mentioned or written in the partnership deed. The partner who is running business in a particular year shall appropriate all the profits and suffer all the losses and there will be no contribution to the loss by any partner nor any other partner is entitled to claim any share in the 4 4 4 profit. This will continue and apply in respect of each and every partner during his turn. Whatever royalty or compensation has been deposited by Kamlesh right from beginning pursuant to the order of this Court till this date will be distributed as follows:- 1/4th for Fauzdar Bhagwati Singh or his legal heirs; 1/4th for Sakalnarayan Sitalaprasad Singh or his legal heirs; 1/4th for Mangalaprasad Bindeshwari Singh and remaining 1/4th amongst the legal heirs of Jagannath Bindeshwari Singh excluding the appellant Kamlesh. All concerned parties to act upon ordinary copy of this order duly authenticated by the Court Sheristedar. [D.G.DESHPANDE] 27/01/2005 JUDGE. Dated : 4th February 2005. 5 5 5 1. The matter is on board for directions. An order was passed by me by consent of the parties on 27th January 2005. The order was dictated in open Court. Now counsel for the respondents contends that the 1/4th share of the royalty which is given in the aforesaid order to the legal heirs of Jagannath Bindeshwari Singh excluding appellant Kamlesh should not be distributed to them at all. Because according to him all heirs of Avadh Singh i.e. Kamalesh and ors filed the suit on forged and fabricated documents. This submission, is coming after passing of the order by consent of the parties in open court, cannot now be considered. Prayer rejected. Order will remain as it is. [D.G.DESHPANDE] 04/02/2005 JUDGE.