In THE pioneering decision of CIT v. Dwarkadas Khetan- Co , the Supreme Court ruled that a minor should not become a qualified partner in an established business. The only concession that Section 30 of the Indian Partnership Act offers is that a minor may be admitted into the privileges of an established corporation. The decision also overturned the decision of the Bombay High Court. It found that the income tax department could not declare a partnership in which a minor was a partner, to the extent that he had to be personally liable for the losses, with the right to vote and participation in the company. The issue before the Apex court in Shivgouda Rajiv Patil v. Chandrakant Neelkanth Sedlage was that the minor who reached the age of majority after committing bankruptcy by other partners could be personally held responsible. The Tribunal made its decision in favour of the minor and found that a minor entitled to the company`s benefits could not be held liable for such a bankruptcy. And while the amendment made by these statutes is recorded in the statutes and terms of the partnership, in accordance with the Partnership Act and the Income Tax Act, under the prescribed conditions. Under Section 3 of the Indian Majority Act, a person who has not reached the age of majority, that is, 18 years of age, is classified as a minor. However, a minor may be admitted to the benefits of a partnership. These laws were recognized by the express adoption of Section 30, paragraph 1. A special commission that drafted the Indian Partnership Act implemented the bill stated that this was the general rule in India that minors could be entitled to the benefits of a partnership.
In light of these findings, the Committee therefore agreed to require minor non-convictions of the partnership, since the partnership is the result of a contract to which a minor cannot join. Nevertheless, with the agreement of all the current partners of the partnership, they allowed a minor to be admitted to the benefits of a partnership.  Even before the Indian Partnership Act of 1932, there was a law in India that governed that a minor could not be a contract at all and therefore could not be a partner.  The Indian Majority Act Section 3 stipulates that a person who has not reached the age of majority, 18 years of age, is known as a minor.  In addition, the Indian Contract Act 1857 expressly states that no person under the age of 18 (minor) may be a party to a contract and that a partnership is a contract between the two partners.  Therefore, a minor cannot be a partner in a partnership company. It was supported by the verdict of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Addepally Nageshwar Rao.  Right of appeal:- [Section 30(4)] A minor may sue the necessary partners on the account or payment of his property or profits.