OM PRAKASH Vs. USHA RANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The report of the Special Committee on basis of which the Partnership Act, 1932 was passed later in paragraph 17 noticed:

(2.) The above extract refers to the English precedent which is partly followed and party not enacted in Section 69 of the Indian Partnership act. Section 69 of the Partnership Act unfolds in the following words:-

(3.) The provisions are clear and unambiguous. Sub-section (1) to Section 69 of the Partnership Act in so many words state that no suit to enforce a right arising from a contract or conferred by Partnership act can be instituted in any court by or on behalf of any person suing as a partner in a firm against the firm unless the same is registered and the person suing is shown as one of the partners in the said register. Sub-section (2) to Section 69 further prescribes that no suit to enforce a right arising from a contract can be instituted in any court by or on behalf of the firm against any third person unless the firm is registered. Sub-section (3) to Section 69 also cannot be ignored and in so many words state that provisions of sub-section (1) and (2) shall also apply to a claim of set off or other proceedings to enforce a right arising from a contract but notwithstanding sub-section (1) and (2) shall affect enforcement of any right but issue for dissolution of a firm or for accounts of a dissolved firms or any r ight to realise property of a dissolved firm. In this backdrop one has to consider the controversy as to whether an application under Section 20/8 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 would be maintainable by a partner of a firm which is not registered.