<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1904 (12) TMI 1 - Madras High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292082</link>
    <description>A contractual partnership is dissolved on the death of one partner, unless a fresh arrangement to continue the business can be inferred from later conduct. On that basis, a general suit for accounts and share of profits is governed by the applicable limitation period and may be time-barred. However, a separate claim limited to the plaintiff&#039;s share in partnership assets realised by the other partners after compromise is not necessarily barred with the general account claim, because it concerns a narrower inquiry and does not require reopening the entire partnership accounts. The matter was remanded to examine implied continuation of the partnership and, failing that, entitlement to a share in the realised assets.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 21 Dec 1904 00:00:00 +0521</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 05 Dec 2020 18:22:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=629486" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1904 (12) TMI 1 - Madras High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292082</link>
      <description>A contractual partnership is dissolved on the death of one partner, unless a fresh arrangement to continue the business can be inferred from later conduct. On that basis, a general suit for accounts and share of profits is governed by the applicable limitation period and may be time-barred. However, a separate claim limited to the plaintiff&#039;s share in partnership assets realised by the other partners after compromise is not necessarily barred with the general account claim, because it concerns a narrower inquiry and does not require reopening the entire partnership accounts. The matter was remanded to examine implied continuation of the partnership and, failing that, entitlement to a share in the realised assets.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Dec 1904 00:00:00 +0521</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292082</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>