https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289203 Limitation was not a bar because the cause of action arose on the death of the managing partner in March 1930, and the suit filed in December 1931 was within time. The suit, however, was not properly maintainable in its original form because all necessary members of the firm were not before the court; that defect could be cured by joining Mohun Singh as co-plaintiff in his representative and personal capacities and by amending the plaint under Order 1, Rule 10(1) CPC. The proposed variation of the decree directing sale of the business without first giving an option to purchase the share was rejected, as the decree conformed to the CPC and no such relief had been sought below. The decrees below were set aside and retrial ordered after amendment. en-us Mon, 18 Dec 1944 00:00:00 +0630 Mon, 20 Jul 2020 10:04:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289203 Limitation was not a bar because the cause of action arose on the death of the managing partner in March 1930, and the suit filed in December 1931 was within time. The suit, however, was not properly maintainable in its original form because all necessary members of the firm were not before the court; that defect could be cured by joining Mohun Singh as co-plaintiff in his representative and personal capacities and by amending the plaint under Order 1, Rule 10(1) CPC. The proposed variation of the decree directing sale of the business without first giving an option to purchase the share was rejected, as the decree conformed to the CPC and no such relief had been sought below. The decrees below were set aside and retrial ordered after amendment. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 18 Dec 1944 00:00:00 +0630 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289203