VIDYA SAGAR GUPTA Vs. SURAJ KARAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application u/s 20 of the Arbitration Act (hereinafter the Act) for referring certain disputes mentioned therein to an Arbitrator. The factual background in which this application has arisen is that :

(2.) THE petitioner has come forward with a case that he is one of the partners in a firm, named, Suraj Ice and Cold Storage, Talab Tilloo, Jammu by virtue of a partnership deed executed. and registered on

(3.) -2 -1976; the others being the respondents themselves. His share in the partnership business is 20 percent whereas the share of the respondents is 80 percent. He has invested a sum of nearly Rs. 62,000/ - in the business, but respondent No: 3 who is to maintain the accounts of the firm, does not permit him to inspect the accounts books. The firm, according to him, has earned huge profits, but respondent No : 3 in collusion with the other respondents, who are his real brothers, is preparing fictitious accounts to harm the petitioner, so much so, that they are even denying the fact that he is one of the partners in the firm. He is no more interested in continuing as a partner and has served a notice on the respondents to dissolve the firm after settling the accounts but they have not paid any heed to it. He has, therefore, made a prayer that in terms of Clause 10 of the agreement, the disputes may be referred to an Arbitrator. 3. The case of the respondents on the other hand is that the partnership business between the parties has not gone beyond raising a shed and installing a diffuser therein, because the petitioner refused to extend co -operation as agreed to by him with the result that the partnership has failed to transact any business so far. To this extent the accounts too have been kept wide open which the petitioner has also inspected and is entitled to inspect any time he likes. The petitioner, according to them is extending his claim to other business in which he is not a partner and has, therefore, made this application to harass the respondents. They have also pleaded that the petition is not maintainable because it is neither accompanied by an affidavit nor by a certified copy of the agreement and the arbitration clause too is vague and uncertain, adding further, that the firm is not registered with the Registrar of firms under the provisions of the Partnership Act. This controversy has given rise to the following issues : 1. Is the Clause in the alleged agreement under which a reference to the Arbitration is sought illegal, unenforceable, and uncertain ? If so, how ? O.P.D. 2. Is the application liable to be dismissed because it is not accompanied by either an affidavit or by an attested copy of the alleged agreement ? O. P. D. 3. Is the partnership between the parties duly registered under the provisions of Partnership Act ? 0, P, D,