ISHWARCHAND JAIN Vs. SUSHIL KUMAR JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners/defendants being aggrieved by the order dated 10. 4. 2008 passed in Misc. Appeal No. 2/2008 decided by learned Third Additional district Judge (Fast Track) Katni reversing the order dated 17. 1. 2008 passed by fourth Civil Judge, Class-I, Katni in Civil Suit No. 59 A/2007 and granting injunction in favour of the respondent/plaintiff, have filed this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) THE short facts necessary for disposal of the present petition are that the petitioners and the respondent/plaintiff settled into a partnership business vide partnership deed dated 11. 2. 2003, all the partners agreed to have 25% share in profit and loss. It appears that the present respondent/plaintiff felt aggrieved by conduct of the remaining three partners, therefore, filed the suit for dissolution of the firm/partnership and alongwith the plaint, filed an application for grant of injunction. The defendants appeared in the Court and submitted that the plaintiff had retired from the partnership firm with effect from 30. 9. 2004 and as on the date of the suit he had no right, interest or property in the firm, no injunction could be granted in his favour.

(3.) AFTER hearing learned counsel for the parties, the learned trial Court rejected the plaintiff's prayer for grant of injunction but, however, in appeal the Appellate court granted the injunction. It is to be seen that the Appellate Court granted the injunction restraining the defendants from using the name of firm, using its goodwill, its property with a further direction that they shall not transfer or alienate any property and if the plaintiff wants to have inspection of the accounts then the defendants would not cause any hindrance in the matter.