SHREEMANT KUMAR CHOUDHARY Vs. YASHWANT KUMAR CHOUDHARY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS civil revision by the plaintiff is directed against order dated 19th June, 1996 passed by the 1st subordinate Judge, Sitamarhi, in Title suit No 126 of 1987, adding opposite party no. 1 Yashwant Kumar Choudhary as intervenor -defendant on application filed by him in that regard under Order 1 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

(2.) THE plaintiff filed the suit for dissolution of partnership and division of assets and liabilities of M/s Kumar Talkies, Dalsingsarai, and for closure of business. Shortly stated his case is that on 31st August, 1972 he entered into partnership with the defendants to run cinema business in the name of M/s Kumar Talkies and a deed of partnership was executed creating partnership at will. Defendant no.1 (opp. party no.2 herein) in collusion with and at the instance of the other defendants deprived the plaintiff of his share of profit and access to the account. He served notice to the defendants for dissolution of the partnership firm and ultimately filed the suit it appears that the suit was referred to for arbitration. The Arbitrator filed his award in Court on 25th August, 1991. The defendants have filed objection to the award, which is pending. On 20th February, 1993 the application for intervention was filed.

(3.) THE submission of the counsel for the petitioner is that in a suit for dissolution of partnership only the partners are the necessary parties. Intervention by a third party is wholly unwarranted. Order 1 Rule 10 of the Code contemplates addition of a person who is either proper or necessary party for the adjudication of the dispute involved in the suit. Opposite party no.1 being stranger to the partnership firm, his presence is not necessary for adjudication of any dispute touching upon the partnership.