SADARAM VISWESWARA RAO Vs. MALLA SEETHA RATNAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision Petition is filed against the order dt. 18.10.2005 in I.A. No. 560 of 2005 in O.S. No. 2286 of 2005 on the file of the II Addl. Junior Civil Judge, Visakhapatnam.

(2.) The revision petitioner is the plaintiff in O.S. No. 2286 of 2005 before the court below. He instituted the suit contending that he is a partner of the ' firm Parameswari Picutre Palace, Visakhapatnam and there was an agreement between all the partners of the firm that the leasehold rights shall be auctioned and the highest bidder is entitled to run the theatre. The revision petitioner claims that he became the highest bidder in the auction for an amount of Rs. 60,000/- and took possession of the theatre and was running the same. While so, it is said that the respondent tried to interfere with his possession and enjoyment of the theatre, which lead to filing of the suit for permanent injunction by him. The defendant who is the respondent herein filed written statement contending, inter alia, that the suit is liable to be rejected for want of registration of the partnership firm, as required under Section 69 of the Indian Partnership Act, 1934 (for short 'the Act') and the firm not being registered, the revision petitioner, who is admittedly a partner of the firm, cannot institute the suit.

(3.) The respondent/defendant filed I.A. No. 560 of 2005 in the suit under Order VII Rule 11 (a) (d) r/w Section 151 C.P.C. urging the court to reject the plaint with exemplary costs. The trial court having made an enquiry into the said interlocutory application arrived at the conclusion that to enable a partner to file a suit as a partner or on behalf of the partnership firm, the firm should be registered and accordingly issued a direction to the revision petitioner to get the defect rectified i.e. to get the unregistered firm registered as per the Provisions of the Act on or before 1.12.2005 to prosecute the suit. The said finding is impugned in this revision.