ASHA LALIT KANODIA Vs. VIJAYKUMAR SURAJMAL KANODIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition has been filed under section 30 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 and the relief sought is that the award dated March 31, 1975 be declared null and void or it may be set aside and quashed.

(2.) THE facts which have given rise to the filling of this petition are as follows : THE respondents Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5, and husband of the petitioner are real brothers. THE respondent No. 3. is their mother. THE parties carried on business in partnership under the name and style of Messrs. Datamatics Corporation and the terms and conditions on which the partnership subsisted were reduced in writing in a deed of partnership dated December 26, 1969. THE firm was carrying on business under three distinct divisions, viz., (1) Training, (2) Computer system, and (3) Staffing. THE partnership had Head Office at Bombay and several other Offices at Delhi, Calcutta, Madras, Bangalore and Ahmedabad. At all these places, the business was carried on into the premises which were taken on lease. In respect of three divisions, the parties used to maintain separate books of accounts at each office and balance-sheets used to be drawn up in respect of each of the divisions separately. THE audited balance-sheet of each of the divisions ultimately merged in the balance-sheet of the firm referred to as Head Office.

(3.) MR. Mehta entered upon the reference and the parties appeared before him and produced information sought by him. During the course of the proceedings, the respondents Nos. 2 to 5 delivered to the Arbitrator letter on March 27,1975 confirming they were willing to withdraw from the partnership from April 1,1975 on their receiving Rs. 45,000/-, Rs. 96,000/-, Rs. 10,000/-, and Rs. 5,000/- respectively. In view of this decision of respondents Nos. 2 to 5, the dispute survived, before the Arbitrator only between the petitioner and respondent No. 1. During the course of the hearing, it was agreed between the parties that with effect from April 1, 1974, the training division should be taken over and allotted to respondent No. 1 exclusively, while the computering and staffing division should be allotted to the petitioner. The petitioner and respondent No.1 accordingly took over the business and agreed to maintain separate account in respect of the division allotted to them.