Law: Partnership Act (IX of 1932)

Section: 19(2),19(h),62

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1962

Section: 63

  Partnership Act (IX of 1932), S. 19(2)(h)-Members of five firms entering into partnership on behalf of their respective firms-Suit by partnership firm so constituted-No plea raised by defendants that such members had no authority from their respective firms to enter into partnership-Question requiring further investigation into facts, cannot be allowed to be re-agitated at appellate stage.   Partnership Act (IX of 1932), S. 69-Dissolution of firmDissolved firm assigning to one of its members "all their rights, titles and interests in or relating to outstanding claims"-Suit by such member in his own name-Not hit by subsections (1) & (2) of S. 69.   Sudhangsu Bimal Biswas v. Md. Mustafa Chowdhury and others P L D 1959 S C (Pak.) 319; Sohanlal Pachisia & Co. v. Bilasray Khemani and others A I R 1954 Cal. 179 and Bajranglal Maniram Singhvi Agarwal v. Anandilal Ramchandra Potdar and another A I R 1944 Nag. 124 ref.   Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882), S. 135-A-Insurer, on payment, subrogated in place of insured-Right of insured, nevertheless, to file suit for and on behalf of insurer not taken away.   East & West Steamship Co. v. Queensland Insurance Co. P L D 1963 S C 663 distinguished.   Indian Trade & General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Union of India A I R 1957 Cal. 190; Santuram Hari v. Trust of India Assurance Co. and another A I R 1945 Bom. II; Textiles and Yarn Ltd. v. Indian National Steamship Co. Ltd. A I R 1964 Cal. 362; Lala Kapurehand Godha and others v. Mir Nawab Himayatalikhan Azamjah A I R 1963 S C 250 and Shah Mulji Deoji (a Firm) v. Union of India A I R 1957 Nag. 31 ref.   Constitution of Pakistan (1962), Art. 63-Observations of Supreme Court, even if obiter, binding on High Court.   Damages-Shipment of goods-Mere note in bill of lading that bales were bound with rusty hoops and torn wrappers-No ground for holding that goods when shipped were in damaged condition.    JUDGMENT   HASAN, J.-The plaintiff is the appellant before us. According to the plaintiff, the City Chamber Yarn Corporation, Chittagong, of which the plaintiff and the defendants Nos. 3, 4, 5 and 7 were…