Baboo Janokey Doss and Damoder Doss, - Appellants; Bindabun Doss, Brijrutton Doss, Honoman Doss, and Janokey Doss, - Respondents
| Jurisdiction | UK Non-devolved |
| Judgment Date | 25 February 1843 |
| Date | 25 February 1843 |
| Court | Privy Council |
English Reports Citation: 18 E.R. 464
ON APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT AT CALCUTTA.
As to Jurisdiction, see A.-G. of Bengal v. Ranee Surnomoye Dossee, 1863, 9 Moo. Ind. App. 421.
[175] BABOO JANOKEY DOSS and DAMODER DOSS,-Appellants; BINDABUN DOSS, BRIJRUTTON DOSS, HONOMAN DOSS, and JANOKEY DOSS - Respondents * [Feb. 23, 24, and 25, 1843]. On appeal from the Supreme Court at Calcutta, Decree for an account of dealings and transactions of a deceased partner in an Hindoo family bank, and for a dissolution of the partnership, reversed on the ground that the respective rights of the parties were not sufficiently denned, and declared, and that the decree, under any circumstances, was erroneous, being made without the heir or legal representative of the deceased partner being a party to the suit. An inhabitant of Benares, trading at Calcutta, and having a house of business there, held to be subject to the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. This was an Appeal from the Equity side of the Supreme Court. The Bill was filed by one Muttychund, the father of the Respondents, Bindabun Doss, and Brijrutton Doss, against the Appellants and the Respondents, Honornan Doss and Janokey Doss, for dissolution of a partnership and for an account, under the following circumstances:-Gopaul Doss, an Hindoo banker, [176] was entitled to a moiety or half share of a certain ancestral banking establishment at Benares, which was carried on by himself and other branches of his family, under the style of " Bhoyaram Gopaul Doss." This concern had branch and dependant banks at Nagpore, and various other places. In the year 1785, Gopaul Doss died intestate, leaving four sons, Gocool Doss, Monohur Doss, Ramchund, and Muttychund, who became equally entitled to the share of their father in the family bank of Bhoyaram Gopaul Doss. Some time after the death of Gopaul Doss, and about the year 1791, the sharers and partners in the bank came to a partial division of their capital, stock, and profits, when the branch and dependant bank at Nagpore was allotted in severalty to the heirs and representatives of Gopaul Doss, namely, his four sons, who afterwards came to a division of all their own joint property, with the single exception of the Nagpore bank. Gocool Doss took upon himself the management of this bank, and continued to carry on the same, for the benefit of himself and his co-sharers, under the style of " Gopaul Doss Bhowanny Doss," until his death, which happened in the year 1795. Gocool Doss left no issue. Upon his death his fourth share in the Nagpore bank became, by virtue of a deed of gift, vested in his brother Muttychund, by whom, in the year 1797, one-half of such share was given to Ramchund. On the death of Gocool Doss, his brother Ramchund, the father of the Appellants, became the manager of the Nagpore bank, and also of a bank at Cuttack, which appeared to have been opened by Ramchund. The business of these banks was conducted by Ramchund, through the agency of gomastahs, for the benefit of himself and his co-sharers, Muttychund and Monohur Doss. [177] In the beginning of the year 1797, an agreement was entered into between Ramchund and Muttychund, with respect to the share in the Nagpore bank, which had belonged to their deceased brother, Gocool Doss, and on the 10th of February in that year an instrument was executed by Muttychund, whereby he agreed that * Present:-Members of the Judicial Committee,-The Lord President (Lord Wharncliffe), Lord Brougham, Mr. Baron Parke, and the Right Hon. Dr. Lushington. Privy Councillors,-Assessors,-Sir E. H. East, Bart., Sir A. Johnston, Knt. 464 BABOO JANOKEY DOSS V. BINDABUN DOSS [1843] III MOORE IND. APP., 178 the capital and profits of such share should be divided between himself and Ram-chund, in equal moieties. In consequence of this arrangement, Muttychund and Ramchund became each entitled to three-eighth shares in the Nagpore bank, the remaining two-eighth shares being the property of Monohur Doss. In the year 1805-6, the branch or dependant bank at Cuttack was finally closed and discontinued, and the accounts of the firm forwarded to and deposited in the superior bank at Nagpore. Ramchund and Muttychund both lived at Benares during the whole time of Ramchund's management of the banks, from 1795 to 1828. In the year 1819, Monohur Doss died intestate, leaving his only son Mocundloll his heir and representative, who thereupon became entitled to the two-eighth shares in the bank at Nagpore which.had previously belonged to his father. Mocundloll died in September 1823, intestate, leaving a widow named Tazoo Bohoo, and three sons, namely, Ram Doss, Janokey Doss, and Honoman Doss, who thereupon became jointly entitled to the two-eighth shares of their father, in the Nagpore bank and its dependencies. On the 14th of June, 1826, the firm of Muttychund, which up to that time had been caried on by Ramchund at Calcutta, was finally closed, and an advertisement to that effect was a few days afterwards published in the Calcutta Government Gazette, in the English, [178] Persia,n, Bengalee and Nagree languages, and all persons having claims on the Calcutta concern were requested to make the same known to Ramchund at Benares, by whom the same would be adjusted. An announcement was published in like manner, stating that the Appellants, therein described as bankers in the city of Benares, had opened a bank in Calcutta on the 15th of the same month of June, under the name of " Muttychund gomastah Baboo Janokey Doss and Damoder Doss." This bank, it was alleged, was established by the Appellants with their own funds, and on their account, and was not a branch bank, or in any way connected with that at Nagpore; and it was insisted that neither Ramchund nor any other person but the Appellants had any interest therein. It was also alleged that about this time a banking establishment at Benares, under the firm of " Muddun Gopaul Janokey Doss," was established by the Appellants on their own account, and with their own funds, independently of Ramchund. The firms of Brijomohun Doss Ramchund and the bank at Nagpore continued to be conducted by Ramchund, the latter until his last illness, and the former up to the time of his death. In the month of November 1827, the Appellants opened a bank at Benares, under the style of " Janokey Doss Damoder D'oss." Ramchund, it was insisted, had at no time any control or interest in this establishment. On the 10th of January 1828, Ramchund made and executed a Will, whereby, after appointing his brother-in-law. Baboo Dhurrum Doss, his executor (vassee), and bequeathing several pecuniary legacies, principally to the female branches of his own family, he bequeathed the residue of his real and personal [179] estate to his grandson Baboo Hurry Doss, the son of Janokey Doss, the Appellant. The right to make such a Will, as well as its effect and operation, were contested in the suit, but was not affected by the decision on the Appeal. On the death of Ramchund, his brother-in-law and executor Dhurrum Doss, took possession of all his real and personal estate, and managed and carried on the business of the firm of " Brijomohun Doss Ramchund," for the benefit and on account of the devisee and residuary Jegatee, Hurry Doss, then a minor. On the 22nd of November, 1830, Muttychund, the brother of Ramchund, and the father of the Respondents, Bindabun Doss and Brijrutton Doss, filed a bill on the Equity side of the Supreme Court of Judicature at Fort William in Bengal, against the Appellants, and the Respondents Honoman Doss (one of the sons of Mocundloll and grandson of Monohur Doss), and also against Ram Doss and Janokey Doss, (the other two sons of Mocundloll,) when they should respectively come within the jurisdiction, praying that an account might be taken between him, Muttychund, and the Appellants, and the sons of Mocundloll, of the profits, dealings and transactions of the firm Gopaul Doss Bhowanny Doss at Nagpore, during the management of Ramchund, particularly of all monies, jewels, effects, securities and property belonging thereto, withdrawn or taken out of the bank by Ramchund, or by his order, and 465 Ill MOORE IND. APP., 180 BABOO JANOKEY DOSS V. BIKDABUN DOSS [1843] applied in his own trade, or to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
RBTT Bank Jamaica Ltd v YP Seaton and Others
...The basis on which the remedy of account will be granted was stated by Dr Lushington in Doss v Doss (1843) 3 Moo Ind App 175 at 176 – 90; 18 ER 464 at 472: …we cannot make a Decree, ordering them to account, without first determining that they are liable to pay if anything be found due, a d......
-
[1] Zorin Sachak Khan [2] Afaque Ahmed Khan [3] Sasheen Anwar Appellants v [1] Gany Holdings (PTC) SA [2] Asif Rangoonwala Respondents
...74. 19 At para. 76. 20 At para. 72. 21 [2013] UKSC 26. 22 [1984] Ch 100 . 23 At para. 76. 24 At paras. 78–80 of the judgment. 25 (1843) 3 Moo Ind App 175, 196–197 26 [2005] EWHC 1638 (Ch). 27 At p. 220. 28 At p. 221. 29 At para. 65 of the judgment. 30 At para. 40 of Zorin's skeleton argume......
-
Equitable compensation for breach of trust: off Target.
...eg, Libertarian Investments Ltd v Hall (2013) 16 HKCFAR 681, 732 [168] (Lord Millett NPJ). (35) Doss v Doss (1846) 3 Moo Ind App 175, 197; 18 ER 464, 472 (Dr Lushington for Dr Lushington, Parke B and Lord (36) Meehan v Glazier Holdings Pty Ltd (2002) 54 NSWLR 146, 149 [13] (Giles JA). (37) ......