SHILPI MODES PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. SHILPI UNITECH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order shall dispose of the application filed by the plaintiff under Order 39, Rules I and 2 read with Order 39, Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure and also the application namely, I.A. 9309/1995 filed on behalf of defendants 2 to 4 under Order 39, Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

(2.) The plaintiff instituted the present suit against the defendants seeking for a decree for declaration for dissolution of defendant No. 1 and also for rendition of accounts by defendant No. 2 and after such rendition of account to pass a decree in favour of the plaintiff and against defendants 2 to 4 in respect of the amount found to be due to it.

(3.) The case pleaded in the plaint is that the defendant No. 1 is a single venture partnership of the plaintiff and the defendant No. 2. It is alleged that a partnership agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant No. 2 had come into existence and acted upon and that although in respect of the said single venture partnership entered into between the plaintiff and the defendant No. 2 no name was given but the said name as the defendant No. 1 could be used as the description of the fact that a partnership agreement between the two had come into existence. It is alleged that the plaintiff purchased 67acresofland in VillageGawal Pahari and another 40acres of land was acquired by it in Hyderpur. Besides the plaintiff company also had agreement with land owners for purchase of approximately 180 acres of land in Village Hyderpur. In respect of the aforesaid land the plaintiff entered into a partnership business with defendant No. 2 to develop the said land by both the parties for the purpose of colonisation project. It is stated that the defendants in the course of negotiations made detailed enqui"ies and all negotiations in respect of the aforesaid land. On 7.10.1991 the terms were reduced into writing in an alleged partnership agreement described as Memorandum of Understanding. A copy of the said Memorandum of Understanding is on record. The parties agreed that the expenses for development of the land which was in the ownership of plaintiff company through sale deed was to be shared between the plaintiff and defendant No. 2 company in the ratio of 55% for the plaintiff and 45% for the defendant No. 2, and the expenses for development of the land which was in the agreement for the purchase was to be shared in the ratio of 65:35 between the plaintiff and defendant No. 2 respectively. The defendant company under re-structured agreement assured the payment of Rs. 10 lacs per week from middle of November, 1991 till January, 1992 to fulfil the minimum requirement and in terms thereof the defendant company No. 2 gave two cheques of Rs. 15 lacs each alongwith covering letters that the payment of the same was assured. However, when the aforesaid 2 cheques were presented to the Bank the same were dishonoured on the ground that the "drawer had stopped the payment". In view of the failure on the part of the defendant No. 2 to honour its commitment under the MOU the present suit has been instituted by the plaintiff for the aforesaid reliefs.