Teague vs. Martin, 53 Phil.

504 exclusively to Teague,

but he must return to and
reimburse the
partnership the amount which was taken
It was alleged, among others, by the plaintiff that he and from its funds for the
purchase of the Lapu-Lapu and the
the defendants formed a partnership for the operation of Ford truck.
a fish business and similar commercial transactions,
which by mutual consent was called "Malangpaya Fish Upon appeal, the
plaintiff further contended that he is the
Co.," with a capital of P35,000, of which plaintiff paid managing partner of
the partnership and the three
P25,000, the defendants Martin P5,000, Maddy P2,500, properties (Lapu-Lapu,
Barracuda & Ford truck) are
and Golucke P2,500; that he was named the general properties of the
partnership since they were paid from
partner; that the share in the profits and losses is in the profits of the
partnership thus do not belong to him.
proportion to the amount of contributed capital; that
there was no agreement as to the duration of the ISSUES:
partnership; that he wants to dissolve it, but the
defendants refused to do so; that the partnership WON the plaintiff was
the manager of the unregistered
purchased and owns a lighter (Lapu-Lapu), a motorship partnership of
Malangpaya Fish Company.
(Barracuda), and other properties, which are in the
possession of the defendants who are making use of WON the three
properties are owned by the partnership.
them. It was alleged that it is the best interest of the
parties to have a receiver appointed pending this RULING:
litigation, to take possession of the properties, and he
prays that the Philippine Trust Company be appointed Yes, the powers and
duties of the three partners are
receiver, and for judgment dissolving the partnership, specifically defined,
and that each of them was more or
with costs. less the general
manager in his particular part of the
business. The
plaintiff’s powers and duties were confined
Each of the defendants filed a separate answer, but of the and limited to
"selling fish in Manila and the purchase of
same nature. It is then alleged, among others, that supplies."
Maddy will have charge of the Barracuda and the
navigating of the same, salary P300 per month; Martin No, the Lapu-Lapu,
Barracuda, and the adding machine,
will have charge of the southern station, cold stores, although paid for by
the partnership funds, are owned by
commissary and procuring fish, salary P300 per month; petitioner for it was
registered in his own name. He is
Teague will have charge of selling fish in Manila and estopped from claiming
otherwise. The purchase of the
purchasing supplies. No salary until business is on paying properties in question
are not within the scope of
basis. plaintiff’s authority.
It is but right that the plaintiff
reimburse the
partnership for the use of its funds.
The CFI issued a decision: (1) dissolving the partnership However, it noted that
the partnership also made use of
and liquidating its assets; (2) that the barge Lapu-Lapu the Lapu-Lapu. In the
interest of justice, the plaintiff
as well as the Ford truck and adding machine belong should be compensated
for such use.