SHARAD VASANT KOTAK Vs. RAMNIKLAL MOHANLAL CHAWDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Judgment of the court was delivered by

(2.) LEAVE granted.

(3.) THE amendment sought was seriously opposed by the appellants inter alia contending that the suit as filed was maintainable and. therefore, the 176 amendment cannot be allowed. In other words, according to the appellants on and from 20/10/1986 when a new partnership deed was made, the registration already given to the firm ceased to have validity and the a partnership as at present must be deemed to be an unregistered one and, therefore, the suit was hit by Section 69(2-A). It was also contended that without impleading the State of Maharashtra and the Union of India, the vires of Section 69(2-A) in the Partnership Act cannot be challenged. THE learned trial Judge accepting the objections raised by the appellants found that Section 69(2-A) of the Act creates a bar on the threshold of the filing of the suit for the relief covered in the suit and the very suit filed by the plaintiff was incompetent. That being the position, the application for amendment could not be permitted. Consequently, the application was rejected.