5 to render accounts of the said firm and for payment of his share of profits and assets. 29. A preliminary decree came to be passed in the said original suit on 26th October, 1988 directing that the firm-defendant No.9 be dissolved and defendant Nos. 1 to 5 to tender accounts of the firm. Respondent No. 1- plaintiff was left at liberty to file separate applications for the appointment of Advocate Commissioner for taking the accounts in respect of the firm and for other appropriate reliefs. Being aggrieved, the defendant No. 1 and the firm- defendant No. 9 preferred C.C.C. Appeal No. 40 of 1999 which came to be rejected vide judgment and decree dated 19th October, 2001, however, a declaration was passed that respondent No. 1- plaintiff can seek rendition of accounts for a period of three years prior to the date of filing of the suit and not beyond that. 7 O.S. No. 754 of 1991 later renumbered as O.S. No. 121 of 1997. 1230. Being aggrieved, defendant No. 1 and firm-defendant No. 9