AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
2 paragraphs · 91 wordsBrodhurst and Tyreell, J.—We cannot interfere. The appellant stands in this position that he has declared the firm to which the debt is due to be ancestral, and he has asserted that the control of its business is in the hands of his sons jointly. He calls them "maliks" (proprietors). From either point of view, then, he cannot sustain this suit in his own individual capacity. His sons are his partners in the ancestral business, and he is not the managing member or proprietor.
2.
We dismiss the appeal with costs.