As regards the question whether in the case of a registered firm (whose business was carried on after its dissolution by death of one of the partners), a suit can be filed by the remaining partners in respect of any subsequent dealings or transactions without notifying to the Registrar of Firms, the changes in the constitution of the firm, it was decided that the remaining partners should sue in respect of such subsequent dealings or transactions even though the firm was not registered again after such dissolution and no notice of the partner was given to the Registrar. \nThe test applied in these cases was whether the plaintiff satisfied the only two requirements of Section 69 (2) of the Act namely, \n(a) the suit must be instituted by or on behalf of the firm which had been registered; \n(b) the person suing had been shown as partner in the register of firms. In view of this position of law, the suit is in the case by B and C against X in the name and on behalf of A & Co. is maintainable. \nNow, in 2017, B and C had taken a new partner, D, and then filed a suit against X without fresh registration. Where a new partner is introduced, the fact is to be notified to Registrar who shall make a record of the notice in the entry relating to the firm in the Register of firms. \nTherefore, the firm cannot sue as D’s (new partner’s) name has not been entered in the register of firms. It was pointed out that in the second requirement, the phrase “person suing” means persons in the sense of individuals whose names appear in the register as partners and who must be all partners in the firm at the date of the suit.