A, B and C are partners in a firm called ABC Firm. A, with the intention of deceiving D, a supplier of office stationery, buys certain stationery on behalf of the ABC Firm. The stationery is of use in

Chiragsaini@ · 1 Oct 2024

carried on by the firm, binds the firm. The authority of a partner to bind the firm conferred by this section is called his ‘Implied Authority’ [Sub-Section (1) of section 19]. Furthermore, every partner is in contemplation of law the general and accredited agent of the partnership and may consequently bind all the other partners by his acts in all matters which are within the scope and object of the partnership. Hence, if the partnership is of a general commercial nature, he may buy goods on account of the partnership. Considering the above provisions and explanation, the questions as asked in the problem may be answered as under: (i) The firm’s contention is not tenable, for the reason that the partner, in the usual course of the business on behalf of the firm has an implied authority to bind the firm. The firm is, therefore, liable for the price of the goods. (ii) In the second case also, the answer would be the same as above, i.e. the implied authority of the partner binds the firm. In both the cases, however, the firm ABC can take action against A, the partner but it has to pay the price of stationery to the supplier D.

Chiragsaini@ · 1 Oct 2024

The problem in the question is based on the ‘Implied Authority’ of a partner provided in Section 19 of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932. The section provides that subject to the provisions of Section 22 of the Act, the act of a partner, which is done to carry on, in the usual way, business of the kind