NARENDRA KUMAR SAXENA Vs. PAPER TRADERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Defendant aggrieved by the judgments and decrees passed by the Courts below by which suit of respondent was decreed, has filed this appeal.

(2.) This appeal was admitted on 13-8-1991 on following substantial questions of law : 1. Whether filing of a photocopy of acknowledgment about registration of a firm issued by the Registrar of Firms and exhibited as P-1 was sufficient compliance of Section 68 (2) of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932? 2. Whether in the absence of certified copy of an entry relating to a firm in the Register of Firms, the suit of the respondents was liable to be dismissed as not maintainable?"

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the respondent has filed the present suit on behalf of the Partnership firm. In this regard averment has been made in Para 1 of plaint but the appellant has denied this fact. In these circumstances, to prove the factum that the respondent is a registered firm certified copy of an entry relating to a firm in the Register of Firms ought to have produced but the respondent has filed photocopy of acknowledgment about registration of firm issued by the Registrar of Firms which is not in compliance of Section 68 (2) of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932 (hereinafter referred to as 'Partnership Act'). Learned counsel for the respondent submits that plaintiff firm was a registered firm on the date of filing of suit. Certified copy of acknowledgment about registration of firm has been filed which is according to law and the plaintiff is a partner of the firm. Respondent has duly complied with Section 68 (2) of the Partnership Act. In the circumstances, both the Courts below rightly decreed the suit.