51. Ramnani v.

CA, 196 S 731

Ishwar, Choithram and Navalrai, all surnamed Jethmal Ramnani, are brothers. Ishwar and his spouse
Sonya had their main business based in New York. They executed a general power of attorney on January
24, 1966 appointing Navalrai and Choithram as attorneys-in-fact, empowering them to manage and
conduct their business concern in the Philippines
On February 1, 1966 and on May 16, 1966, Choithram entered into two agreements for the purchase of
two parcels of land located in Barrio Ugong, Pasig, Rizal, from Ortigas & Company, Ltd. Partnership. A
building was constructed thereon by Choithram in 1966. Three other buildings were built thereon by
Choithram through a loan of P100,000.00 obtained from the Merchants Bank as well as the income
derived from the first building.
Sometime in 1970 Ishwar asked Choithram to account for the income and expenses relative to these
properties during the period 1967 to 1970. Choithram failed and refused to render such accounting.
Thereafter, Ishwar revoked the general power of attorney. Choithram and Ortigas were duly notified of
such revocation on April 1, 1971 and May 24, 1971, respectively. Said notice was also registered with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on March 29, 1971 and was published in the April 2, 1971 issue of
The Manila Times for the information of the general public.
ISSUE:
Whether a partnership was formed?
RULING:
The Court held that there was a partnership formed. Even without a written agreement, the scenario is
clear. Spouses Ishwar supplied the capital of $150,000.00 for the business. They entrusted the money to
Choithram to invest in a profitable business venture in the Philippines. For this purpose they appointed
Choithram as their attorney-in-fact. We have a situation where two brothers engaged in a business
venture. One furnished the capital, the other contributed his industry and talent. Justice and equity dictate
that the two share equally the fruit of their joint investment and efforts.