Partnership deed construction confirms a minor admitted only to benefits is not a partner, preserving firm registration.

A partnership deed must be construed as a whole to determine whether a minor is a contracting partner or is merely admitted to the benefits of partnership. Where the recitals and operative clauses state that the minor receives a share in profits, is not liable for losses, and is admitted only to the benefits of the firm, the minor is not a partner in law. The guardian's signature does not alter that legal effect. On that construction, the firm remained eligible for registration under section 26A.

---

---

Issues: Whether, on a proper construction of the partnership deed dated December 1, 1957, a valid partnership was constituted so as to be eligible for registration under section 26A.

Analysis: The deed had to be read as a whole to determine whether the minor was a full-fledged partner or was merely admitted to the benefits of the partnership. The recital expressly stated that the minor was admitted only to the benefits of the partnership. The operative clauses also showed that the minor was allotted a share in profits, was not made liable for losses, and was described as a party admitted to the benefits of the partnership. The fact that the guardian signed the deed did not alter the true legal effect of these recitals and clauses.

Conclusion: The minor was not a partner but was only admitted to the benefits of the partnership, and the firm was entitled to registration under section 26A.

Ratio Decidendi: A partnership deed must be construed as a whole, and where its recitals and operative clauses show that a minor is admitted only to the benefits of partnership, the guardian's signature does not by itself make the minor a contracting partner or invalidate registration.

---