.A. Answer: Such a case came before Rav Amram - he told
the sons (whose mother had the small Kesuvah) to
appease the sons of the other mother - if not, he
will excommunicate them.
I SAW A VERSION THAT HE TOLD THE SONS WHOSE MOTHER HAD THE LARGE KTUVA TO REDUCE THE KTUVAT BENIN DICHRIN AND APPEASE THE SONS OF THE OTHER MOTHER - IS IT LOGICAL? (IS IT THE DISPUTE BETWENN RASHI AND TOSFOE MENTION IN F - 2-I )
B. according the discussion at 93b: which motive has one to invest more than the other parters if when decreasing or damage occor he lose his investment not ralativly - but equal the other
a. I did not find that version. However, if the Halachah is like Tosfos who says that when the estate grows, we give the Kesuvas Benin Dichrin then we will be forced to say that it is the sons of the large Kesuvah who have to appease the sons of the small Kesuvah.
b. There may be other motives which will compel someone to invest more than the partner, such as the partner is a better businessman and it is worthwhile to invest with him, or because one does not have enough money to invest alone and is willing to accept even a smaller investor to be a complete partner. Obviously, this Halachah is only where no other terms were stipulated explicitly. When specific terms are set, then everything is according to the terms agreed upon.
Dov Zupnik