REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

TEXFIELD ENGINEERS Appellant

V/S

TEXTEEMA ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

SUNIL GIRDHARILAL SHAH V. SANJAY NAVNEETDAS SHAH [REFERRED TO]
INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED V. DEVI CONSTRUCTIONS [RELIED ON]
OIL ANDNATURAL GAS CORPORATION LTD. V. SAW PIPES LTD. [DISTINGUISHED]
DHIRENDRA NATH GORAI IN C A NO 85 OF 1961 SUBAL CHANDRA NATH SAHA IN C A NO 86 OF 1961 VS. SUDHIR CHANDRA GHOSHIN BOTH APPEALS :SUDHIR CHANDRA GHOSHIN BOTH APPEALS [REFERRED TO]
JAGDISH CHANDRA GUPTA VS. KAJARIA TRADERS INDIA LIMITED [FOLLOWED ON]
UNION OF INDIA VS. D N REVRI AND CO [REFERRED TO]
RENUSAGAR POWER COMPANY LIMITED VS. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY [FOLLOWED ON]
CONTINENTAL CONSTRUCTION CO LIMITED VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [DISTINGUISHED]
SHREERAM FINANCE CORPORATION VS. YASIN KHAN [REFERRED TO]
DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY VS. KOCHHAR CONSTRUCTION WORK [REFERRED TO]
RAPTAKOS BRETT AND COMPANY LIMITED VS. GANESH PROPERTY [REFERRED TO]
KAMAL PUSHP ENTERPRISES VS. D R CONSTRUCTION COMPANY [REFERRED TO]
BHARAT COKING COAL LIMITED VS. L K AHUJA AND CO [REFERRED TO]
FIRM ASHOK TRADERS VS. GURUMUKH DAS SALUJA [REFERRED TO]
U P STATE SUGAR CORPORATION LIMITED VS. JAIN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY [REFERRED TO]
S B P AND CO VS. PATEL ENGINEERING LTD [REFERRED TO]
RASHTRIYA ISPAT NIGAM LIMITED VS. VERMA TRANSPORT COMPANY [REFERRED TO]
NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA VS. BUMIHIWAY DDB LTD [FOLLOWED ON]
C M C LTD VS. UNIT TRUST OF INDIA [FOLLOWED ON]
MARKFED VANASPATI AND ALLIED INDUSTRIES VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
TDM INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED VS. UE DEVELOPMENT INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [DISTINGUISHED]
DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY VS. R S SHARMA AND CO [FOLLOWED ON]
SECRETARY BHUBANESWAR DEVLOPMENT AUTHORITY VS. SUSANTA KUMAR MISHRA [REFERRED TO]
A P CO OP WOOL SPG MILLS LTD VS. G M AND CO WOOL MERCHANTS [REFERRED TO]
JALAL MOHAMMED IBRAHIM VS. KAKKA MOHAMMED GHOUSE SAHIB [REFERRED TO]
T T K PHARMA LIMITED VS. A G ROBAPHARAM [REFERRED TO]
V V TEXTILES VS. MAHAVIR FABRICS [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are the claimants in the Arbitral proceedings. The learned Arbitrator rejected the claim petition of the petitioners herein accepting the preliminary objection taken by respondents 1 to 3 that as per Section 69 of the Indian Partnership Act, an unregistered firm cannot maintain a suit to enforce a right arising under the contract in any Court by or on behalf of any person suing as a partner of the firm. Thus, by award dated 15.10.2007, under Section 16(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the learned Arbitrator dismissed the claim petition. The learned Arbitrator viewed that the reference to "proceedings" under Section 69(3) of the Indian Partnership Act included arbitration proceedings. Hence, following the decision of the Supreme Court Jagdish Chandra Gupta v. Kajaria Traders (India) Ltd. AIR 1964 SC 1882, the claim made by the petitioner was rejected as hit by the provisions of Section 69(3) read with Section 69(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 as beyond the jurisdiction of the Arbitrator to decide on the claim of the petitioners.

(2.) It is seen that respondents 1 to 3 herein had also made a counter claim. The learned Arbitrator held that the counter claim could be held as a separate proceeding under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and notice would be issued to the party for the adjudication of the counter claim of respondents 1 to 3 against the petitioners.

(3.) Challenging the said award of the learned Arbitrator passed under Section 16(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the present petition is filed.

Click here to view full judgment.

TEXFIELD ENGINEERS MANAGING PARTNER T CHANDRAMOHAN COIMBATORE Vs. TEXTEEMA ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES A PARTNERSHIP FIRM COIMBATORE

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address