Court upholds partnership profit-sharing agreement, maintaining original division. Appellant's appeal dismissed.

The court upheld the agreement between the plaintiff's father and the first defendant regarding profit sharing in the partnership, ruling in favor of maintaining the original division of profits. Despite the appellant's argument for equal sharing post-1931, the court applied Section 17 of the Indian Partnership Act, stating that the partnership terms remained unchanged after the father's death. As there was no specific contract for equal profit sharing, the court dismissed the appeal and upheld the division of profits in the ratio of 9 1/2 annas and 6 1/2 annas, with costs awarded to the respondent.

---

---

Issues:
1. Partnership accounts and profit sharing between the plaintiff and the first defendant.
2. Interpretation of partnership agreement and sharing of profits and losses.
3. Application of Section 13 and Section 17 of the Indian Partnership Act.

Detailed Analysis:

1. The judgment pertains to a suit filed for taking accounts of a partnership between the plaintiff and the first defendant. The partnership was initially between the plaintiff's father and the first defendant, which continued after the father's death, with the plaintiff stepping in. The dispute arose regarding the sharing of profits and losses between the parties.

2. Initially, the partners had agreed to share profits equally, but later an agreement was made between the plaintiff's father and the first defendant to divide profits in the ratio of 9 1/2 annas and 6 1/2 annas. The trial judge ruled in favor of this agreement, stating that the plaintiff was entitled to the share of his deceased father. The appellant argued for equal profit sharing post-1931, but the court held that the partnership continued on the same terms as before, and the plaintiff should maintain the same share.

3. The appellant relied on Section 13 of the Indian Partnership Act, which states partners are entitled to share profits equally unless there is a contract stating otherwise. However, Section 17 was deemed applicable in this case as the partnership continued post the father's death. Section 17 maintains that in such cases, the rights and duties of partners remain the same as before the change in the firm's constitution. Since there was no specific contract for equal profit sharing, the court upheld the original agreement of 9 1/2 annas and 6 1/2 annas division. The appeal was dismissed with costs.

---