YASHANG NAVINBHAI PATEL Vs. DILIPBHAI PRABHUBHAI PATEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these petitions are filed under Sec.11(6) of the Arbitration Act for appointment of an arbitrator in context of a dispute. For the purposes of this order, facts of Arbitration Petition No. 116 of 2020 are taken into consideration.

(2.) The case of the arbitration petitioner is that a firm was formed by original partnership deed dtd. 13/7/1999 for the purposes of engaging in the business of manufacturing, purchase and sale of all types of pump, motor and their spare parts. The partnership was reconstituted by a partnership deed dtd. 1/4/2002. It is the case of the petitioners that petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 held 17% and 34% share in the firm, whereas respondents Nos. 1 and 2 held 34% and 15% respectively. The case of the petitioners further is that despite they holding majority share of 51%, the respondent No.1 started conducting business affairs without consent and knowledge of the petitioners and further from the year 2010-2011, he started going in a unilateral manner. An application, therefore, was filed under Sec.9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act before the City Civil Court being Civil Misc. Application No. 489 of 2012. The application is still pending.

(3.) Mr.Kunal Vyas, learned counsel for the petitioners would submit drawing the Court's attention to Clause 24 of the partnership deed and submit that the disputes amongst the partners was a subject matter of a dispute which was arbitrable under the Arbitration Act , and therefore, invoking the clause in terms of the Act, this Court ought to appoint an arbitrator under Sec.11(6) of the Act.