CA FoundationPartnership Act 1932 - co-ownership and existence of partnership
Can you check my answer on co-ownership versus partnership and tell me how many marks it deserves out of 6?
BrunoAI answer
Your answer is correct: Ram is liable only for his share of Rs. 1,500. I'd give about 4.5 to 5 out of 6. What you did well: - Section 4 definition and the three essentials (agreement, sharing profits of a business, mutual agency) are written clearly. - The facts are applied neatly and the conclusion is right. Where you lost marks: 1. You did not cite Section 6 (mode of determining the existence of partnership). Its Explanation 1 says that sharing the gross returns of jointly owned property does not, by itself, make the owners partners. This is the key provision in the ICAI answer. 2. Add one line that Ram and Raheem are only co-owners of the flat, not partners, so there is no joint liability. 3. Minor point: keep "existence" and "Raheem" spelled correctly and the conclusion tidy.
Read full answer →
1 answer 15 Nov 2026
