Shah v Shah [2017] EWHC 2693 (Ch), [2017] All ER (D) 33 (Nov)
The Chancery Division made various orders concerning the final dissolution of a business, which had been carried out by four brothers as a partnership. Among other things, the court held that that, on the evidence, not all of the claims for an account had been established, but that two of the brothers, the first and second Pt 20 defendants, were jointly and severally liable to account to their brother, the Pt 20 claimant, in respect of a flat in Bombay, which had been included in an agreement between the parties, as an asset of the partnership, but which had been sold without reference to the Pt 20 claimant. Further, the court held that a bungalow in Bangalore, also mentioned in the agreement, had to be brought into account and that the first and second Pt 20 defendants were entitled to look to the Pt 20 claimant for one third of its value.
