L.N. Mittal, J. - (1.) SURINDER Pal -Plaintiff having failed in both the courts below has filed the instant second appeal.
(2.) APPELLANT filed suit against Defendant Charnu Ram (since deceased and represented by Respondents as his legal representatives). The Plaintiff alleged that parties entered into partnership vide partnership deed dated 16.04.1988 to run business in the name of partnership firm M/s Surindera Paint Store in shop No. 77, Rose Garden Market, Patiala. Share of Plaintiff was 90% and share of Defendant was 10%. The Plaintiff accordingly invested 90% of the amount in the business. However soon after the partnership was entered into, the Plaintiff joined government service and, therefore, the Plaintiff appointed his father Shiv Lal as general attorney to manage the business on behalf of the Plaintiff. The Defendant has been maintaining the account books of the business. However, he has refused to rendered accounts of the business. On the other hand, Defendant along with his sons and brother -in -law Balkrishan forcibly took possession of the partnership premises and the goods and forcibly removed the Plaintiff's father from there and has himself misappropriated the goods of the business. The Plaintiff accordingly sought dissolution of partnership and rendition of the accounts thereof. Defendant contested the suit and inter alia pleaded that both the parties entered into partnership, but immediately thereafter, the Plaintiff joined government job and he refused to run the business. Accordingly, the partnership was automatically dissolved. The Defendant alone has been running business since inception. The Defendant never came in possession of the business premises and the question of taking the same forcibly by the Defendant did not arise. Appointment of Plaintiff's father as attorney of the Plaintiff to run the business on his behalf was denied. The other plaint allegations were also broadly denied. Various other pleas were also raised.
(3.) LEARNED Civil Judge (Junior Division), Patiala vide judgment and decree dated 28.10.2005 dismissed the suit. First appeal preferred by the Plaintiff has been dismissed by learned Additional District Judge, Patiala vide judgment and decree dated 19.08.2009. Feeling aggrieved, Plaintiff has filed the instant second appeal.;