H G OOMOR SAIT Vs. O ASLAM SAIT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision is directed against the order of the learned subordinate Judge, Ootacamund, in T.A.No.295 of 2000 in O.S.No.243 of 1999. THIS said application in I.A.No.295 of 2000 was filed by the revision petitioners/defendants 2 and 3 in the suit, under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to direct the dispute raised by the plaintiff to arbitration and refer the parties to such arbitration.

(2.) THE facts which are necessary for the disposal of this petition are as follows: for convenience, the parties are described as plaintiff and defendants. THE plaintiffs and defendants 2 and 3 had constituted a partnership (un-registered). While the second defendant is the father, the plaintiff and the third defendant are brothers being the sons of the second defendant. THE partnership related to the business which they were running under the name and Style "M/s English Boot House", dealing with foot wears and other allied product. While the father was entitled to a share of 40% of the profit and loss, the other sons were entitled to 30% each.

(3.) ALONG with the suit, the plaintiff had also filed I.A.No.1644 of 1999 praying for appointment of Receiver to look after the business of all the three establishments. In the affidavit filed in support of the said application, again the plaintiff had made serious allegations of collusion, diversion of funds, swindling of money etc. To this a detailed counter was filed by the defendants denying all the allegations. In the mean time, the defendants have also filed I.A.No.295 of 2000 under Section 8 of the Arbitration Act, 1996 for referring the disputes to the Arbitrator. On hearing both parties, I.A.No.295 of 2000 was dismissed by the learned Subordinate Judge and hence the above revision petition by defendants 2 and 3.