BARMESWAR PANDEY Vs. SRI. NARAYAN KHANDELWAL AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the order dated 2.8.2008 passed in Arbitration Misc. Case No. 66 of 2008 by the learned District Judge II c, Balasore in exercise of the powers under Sec. 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), the Appellant has filed this appeal.

(2.) The facts of the case are as follows:

(3.) They contended that the Respondents entered into a partnership agreement with the Appellant on 1.2.2008 and the said agreement was registered before the Registrar of Firms in the name and style of M/s. Balasore -Mitrapur Toll Tax Barrier and they claimed that the Appellant, not being in a position to manage the toll gate alone and to pay the minimum guarantee amount to the OBCCL, requested the Respondents to enter into a partnership agreement for management of the aforesaid toll gate. They further contended that from the time of the tender they have paid from their accounts by issuing demand draft in favor of the OBCCL on different occasions. As such, the partnership firm has already taken charge of the toll gate with effect from 1.4.2008 itself and the Appellant has only 20 per cent share in the said partnership and the Respondents being 80 per cent share - holder, they invested the money and are managing the toll gate for the first quarter with effect from 1.4.2008 by depositing money in the bank in the name of the OBCCL. Suddenly, the Appellant did not deposit the huge amount of toll collected, in the bank and misappropriated the same to the tune of Rs. 10,00,000/ - to Rs. 12,00,000/ - belonging to the partnership firm. When the said fact was verified by them, the Appellant threatened them with dire consequences and did not allow them to collect toll and also did not allow them to enter into the toll gate premises since 28.7.2008. As they are entitled to share of profit and loss as per the partnership agreement since they have invested huge amount towards instalments payment, etc., they filed the application as stated above. In the said application they filed a misc. case for ad interim injunction.