LAWS(J&K)-2001-1-26

REVA PARGAL Vs. NARESH KUMAR AND OTHERS

Decided On January 02, 2001
Reva Pargal Appellant
V/S
Naresh Kumar And Others Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An application preferred under Section 8 of the Jammu and Kashmir Arbitration and Conciliation Act which section is in paramateria to the Central Act namely Arbitration and Conciliation Act has been allowed. The proceedings which were initiated by the present petitioner by filing a suit have been stayed. It is against the above order passed by the trial court the present revision has been preferred.

(2.) The present petitioner (here in after referred to as the plaintiff) filed a suit in which a prayer was made for dissolution of the partnership firm and rendition of accounts. In this suit, one Naresh Kumar was also arrayed as a defendant. He is not a partner. This was in addition to defendants No. 1 and 2 who were partners in the firm. To clarify it is restated that defendant No. 3 is not a partner. The application preferred under Section 8 of the Act has been allowed. A finding has been recorded that there did exist an agreement between the plaintiff and the defendants No. 1 and No. 2. As this agreement contained a clause for reference of disputes to arbitration the trial court found merit in the submissions made by defendants No. 1 and 2. The trial court has concluded that in terms of the above Act the proceedings in the suit are required to be stayed. It is against this order this revision petition has been preferred. It is contended that the matter cannot be examined by the arbitrator as defendant No. 3 is not a party to the said agreements. It is submitted that Naresh Kumar is a stranger, it would not be possible for the arbitrator to render any effective award. In addition to this it is submitted that the dissolution of partnership firm is to be ordered under the Supervision and direction of the court and this obligation cannot be entrusted to an arbitrator.

(3.) Another factor which has been pointed out is that in the application preferred by the defendants no. 1 and no. 2 to the suit it is no where stated that they are ready and willing to get the matter referred to the arbitrator.