RAJU M JETHWANI Vs. KISHORE B JETHWANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) (Civil Revision Petition is filed under Art.227 of the Constitution of India, against the order dated 14.11.2006 made in I.A.No: 14864 of 2006 in O.S.No:5 of 2006 passed by the learned II Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai.) This Civil Revision Petition is filed against the order dated 14.11.2006 made in I.A.No: 14864 of 2006 in O.S.No:5 of 2006 passed by the learned II Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, rejecting the request of the petitioners/defendants to reject the plaint itself as not maintainable.

(2.) THE respondent herein filed the suit claiming a sum of Rs.3,85,280.92 together with interest at 18% per annum from the date of plaint till realisation and for costs. Pending the suit, the defendants the interlocutory application contending that in Clause 15 the Partnership Deed executed between the defendants and the plaintiff dated 19.10.2000, it is stated that all the disputes between the partners in relation to partnership business shall be referred to arbitration. THE jurisdiction of a civil court in adjudicating the dispute between the plaintiff and the defendants is completely ousted in view of the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. THE suit is also not maintainable by virtue of misjoinder of cause of action under Order 2, Rule 7 CPC. THE averments in the plaint if taken as such disclose two principal causes of action namely, (i) claim allegedly arising out of the dissolution of partnership as on 5.4.2020 being one of the cause of cause of action and (ii) claim arising out of the financial assistance allegedly given by the plaintiff to he first defendant from 9.1.2003 onwards. According to the defendants these two causes of action are independent of each other and separate in nature and period. THE plaintiff is not entitled to claim any relief on the first cause of action against the second defendant. It is a clear case of misjoinder of cause of action and for this reason also the plaint is liable to be rejected.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners while reiterating the points raised before the lower court relied upon the decision of the Apex Court in Hindustan Petroleum Corpn., ltd., Vs. M/s.Pinkcity Midway Petroleums, reported in 2003 AIR SCW 3558 and contended that the jurisdiction of the civil court is ousted in view of the arbitration clause found in the partnership deed.