SHIVA ENTERPRISES Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri M.D. Singh Shekhar and Sri M.C. Chaturvedi, learned Senior Counsels assisted by Shri R.D. Tiwari and Shri Arun Kumar, learned counsels for the petitioners, and Sri Narendra Kumar Pandey and Ms. Sudha Pandey, learned counsel for respondent Bank.

(2.) The first petitioner i.e. M/s Shiva Enterprises, is a proprietorship firm, second petitioner is the proprietor of the firm. The firm is engaged in the business of construction. Initially, petitioner-firm was a partnership firm which was subsequently dissolved in 2008, thereafter, became a sole proprietorship firm. The firm has a current account, with overdraft facility, being Account No. 1886009300021932, with Panjab National Bank, Branch Kidwai Nagar, Kanpur Nagar.

(3.) On 9/7/2009, partnership firm in the name and style M/s Maa Gayatri Construction was constituted, wherein, one Ranveer Singh and second petitioner were partners. The firm was having facility of current account being Account No. 1886002100023313 in the same branch of the respondent-bank. On 11/7/2011, one of the partner of M/s Maa Gayatri Construction filed an application with the fourth respondent stating therein that the partnership firm has since been dissolved and second partner i.e. second petitioner, henceforth, has no concern with the affairs of the firm. In other words, Ranveer Singh informed the Bank that the firm (M/s Maa Gayatri Construction) has been reconstituted as proprietorship firm of the same name and Ranveer Singh is the sole proprietor. Thereafter, on 12/7/2011, second petitioner being the outgoing partner of the dissolved firm filed an application before the fourth respondent informing that he is no more the partner of M/s Maa Gayatri Construction, with a further request that the account of the firm i.e. A/c No. 1886002100023313, having 'zero' balance, be closed upon dissolution of the firm. The statement of account dtd. 4/7/2011 has been filed (at Annexure-5) to the writ petition to substantiate that on the date when the application was moved by the second petitioner informing the fourth respondent that second petitioner is no longer partner, the outstanding balance in the aforenoted account of the dissolved firm was 'zero'.