SC: Under RTE Act, States Cannot Justify Low Teacher Pay by Citing Centre’s Failure to Release Funds  ||  Supreme Court: While a Child’s Welfare is Paramount, It is Not the Sole Factor in Custody Disputes  ||  Supreme Court: High Court Cannot Reject a Plaint While Exercising Jurisdiction under Article 227  ||  SC: Merely Leasing an Apartment Does Not Bar a Flat Buyer’s Consumer Complaint Against the Builder  ||  Delhi HC: Unproven Adultery Allegations Cannot be Used to Deny Interim Maintenance under the DV Act  ||  Bombay HC: Storing Items in a Fridge isn’t Manufacturing and Doesn’t Make Premises a Factory  ||  Kerala HC: Disability Pension is Not Payable if the Condition is Unrelated to Military Service  ||  Supreme Court: Award Valid Even If Passed After Mandate Expiry When Court Extends Time  ||  Jharkhand HC: Regular Bail Plea During Interim Bail is Not Maintainable under Section 483 BNSS  ||  Cal HC: Theft Claims and Public Humiliation Alone Don’t Amount To Abetment of Suicide U/S 306 IPC    

A.K. Nithyanandham v. Saraswthi Velusamy and Ors. - (High Court of Madras) (13 Aug 2015)

Plaintiff must establish shape and active functioning of partnership if made orally

MANU/TN/2527/2015

Civil

A right to participate in the profits of the trade does not, by itself, demonstrate the existence of a partnership; the relationship also depends on the intention and contract of the parties. Though the Court ascertained an agreement to share profits, it noted that the firm's business was primarily carried on by the Appellant, who also held much of the property in his own name. The Respondent had not averred that it was on her behalf the Appellant had done the same.

Relevant : Section 69 Indian Partnership Act, 1932 Act Paras Nath Thakur v. Smt. Mohani Dasi (deceased) MANU/SC/0156/1959 Yadarao Dajiba Shrawane (dead) by L.Rs. v. Nanilal Harakchand Shah (dead) & others MANU/SC/0639/2002

Tags : PARTNERSHIP   EXISTENCE   INTENTION  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved