VASANTRAO ALIAS BABURAO Vs. SHYAMRAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The two appellants and the six respondents were partners of a firm called "Shivraj Fine Art Litho Works". The appellants as plaintiffs instituted Civil Suit No. 9 of 1974 in the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Nagpur, for dissolution of the partnership and accounts. The reliefs asked for included a declaration that the firm stood dissolved on and from January 9, 1974. It appears that thereafter the original defendants who are the respondents before us were transposed as plaintiffs and the appellants who were originally the plaintiffs were transferred to the category of defendants. The transposed defendants raised an objection that the court had no jurisdiction to entertain the suit in view of the provisions of Part X of the Companies Act, 1956. The trial Court rejected the application. The defendants then moved the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, in revision. The High Court having dismissed the revision petition the present appeal has been filed with special leave granted by this Court.

(2.) It is argued on behalf of the appellants that as Part X of the Companies Act, 1956 contains special provisions for the winding up of unregistered companies, which expression as defined in that Act includes a partnership consisting of more than seven members, any action for the winding up such a partnership must be in accordance with the procedure prescribed for that purpose in the Companies Act, and the suit instituted in the court of the Senior Civil Judge was not maintainable Part X of the Companies Act includes Sections 582 to 590. Section 582 defines the expression "unregistered company" as follows:

(3.) It is difficult to appreciate why the suit should not be maintainable at any rate in so far as it is one for dissolution of the firm. As already stated, one of the reliefs prayed for is a declaration that the firm stood dissolved from January 9, 1974. This is not a relief that can be claimed in a proceeding under Part X of the Companies Act which provides for the winding up of unregistered companies. However it is not necessary to consider whether the Civil Judge had jurisdiction to entertain some of the claims made in the suit, because Section 590 of the Companies Act makes it clear that Part X of the Act does not affect the operation of the Indian Partnership Act. Section 590 states: