SUNITI RANJAN MONDAL Vs. ASI RANJAN MONDAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In view of the short point involved, we take up the appeal itself for hearing.

(2.) By the impugned judgment and decree, a suit filed by the plaintiff/appellant, inter alia for declaration, partition and dissolution of a partnership, was dismissed on the ground that the same was barred under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

(3.) Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, we find that the impugned judgment is not only based on absurd logic but is palpably de hors the law. The learned Trial Judge proceeded on the premise that since there was an arbitration clause in the partition deed between the parties, the provisions of Sec. 42 of the 1996 Act apply and in view of the same, the suit is not maintainable before the Civil Court in its present form.