1 SA 157/2011 abs FARAD CONTINUATION IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SECOND APPEAL NO. 157 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Orders Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's Orders Mr. Drupad Patil for the appellants. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J DATE : 2ND SEPTEMBER 2011 P.C. : 1. The appellants are the original plaintiffs. The respondents are the original defendants. The ancestor of the appellants and the ancestors of the respondents were carrying on business in partnership in the name and style of "Vijay Oil Mills". The appellants' ancestor filed a suit for dissolution of 2 SA 157/2011 partnership and accounts bearing Regular Civil Suit No. 29 of 1970. The dispute was settled out of Court and a deed of dissolution was executed between the parties. Consequently the ancestor of the plaintiffs withdrew the suit. 2. After the death of the plaintiffs' ancestor, the plaintiffs filed Suit No. 355 of 1981 (from which the present second appeal arises) for accounts. The respondents contested the suit. The trial Court dismissed the suit. The lower appellate Court confirmed the order of dismissal. That order is impugned in this second appeal. 3. In my view, the second suit, after dissolution of the firm, was not maintainable. Counsel for the appellants, however, submitted that in the previous suit the suit property, of 3 SA 157/2011 which the accounts are sought, was not included and therefore the suit is maintainable. I am unable to agree. Even if it is assumed that some property was omitted and/or was not mentioned in the first suit, the second suit would be barred by Order II Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure. No question of law, much less a substantial question of law, arise in this second appeal. The appeal is dismissed summarily. (D.G. KARNIK, J.)