ASHOK PARBANDA Vs. VIPIN KUMAR PARBANDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 filed by the petitioner for appointment of an arbitrator for settlement of all disputes and differences between him and the respondent.

(2.) The facts leading to the filing of the petition are as follows:- The petitioner and the respondent were the partners of the partnership firm named M/s.Academia Books International Ltd., which was formed in terms of partnership deed dated 27th June, 1994 ( Annexure P-1 to the petition). The said partnership firm was a registered firm, and both the partners had agreed to act on the terms and conditions embodied in the partnership agreement. Disputes and differences arose between the petitioner and the respondent in the year 2001 and eventually the firm became non-functional. On 28th August, 2004 the petitioner sent a dissolution notice to the respondent through UPC, registered post, fax, e.mail and courier. A copy of the dissolution notice, postal receipt and courier receipt are collectively enclosed as Annexure P-2 to the petition. The petitioner desired that the respondent should agree to the appointment of an arbitrator for settlement of disputes which had arisen between the parties, but the respondent neither agreed to the appointment of arbitrator nor for any settlement. Eventually, on 22nd September, 2004, the petitioner invoked the arbitration clause, being clause-20 of the agreement (Annexure P-1) by serving notice and calling upon the respondent to agree to the appointment of arbitrator for settlement of all disputes. The said notice was despatched to the respondent by UPC, registered post, fax, e.mail and courier. The respondent not having sent any reply to the aforesaid notice, on the passing of 30 clear days the present petition for appointment of arbitrator was instituted by the petitioner. A copy of the arbitration notice, postal and courier receipts are enclosed with the petition and collectively marked ANNEXURE P-3.

(3.) On receipt of the notice of the institution of petition, counsel for the respondent though he did not file reply to the petition, took objection by way of oral submission that M/s.Vipin Kumar Parbanda (HUF) was the partner of the partnership firm named M/s.Academia Books International and hence was a necessary party for the proper adjudication of disputes in these proceedings and also before the arbitrator. The petitioner thereupon moved an application under Order 6 Rule 17 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure for addition of the name of M/s.Vipin Kumar Parbanda (HUF). The petitioner submitted that though Shri Vipin Kumar Parbanda in his individual capacity was the partner of the dissolved partnership firm and M/s.Vipin Kumar Parbanda (HUF) did not have any concern with the partnership firm, by way of abundant caution, the petitioner was praying for impleadment of M/s.Vipin Kumar Parbanda (HUF) as respondent no.2. Notice of the above application was issued to the respondent. Counsel for respondent accepted notice and submitted that he did not want to file any reply to the said application. Accordingly, by order dated 18th August, 2005 M/s.Vipin Kumar Parbanda (HUF) was impleaded as respondent no.2 in his capacity as partner of the partnership firm named M/s.Academia Books International.