OM PRAKASH RAHEJA Vs. SURESH CHANDRA KEDAWAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 has been filed by Shri Om Prakash Raheja praying for appointment of sole arbitrator for adjudicating the dispute between the parties.

(2.) Shri Gaurav Sharma Saraswat, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that The petitioner and the respondent had executed a partnership Deed and entered into a partnership dated 14.02.2009 to carry on a business in the name and style of M/s. V. K. Stationers under which certain liabilities were fastened upon respondent. As per clause 3 of the partnership deed, the premises for carrying out business was provided by the petitioner. Clause 6 thereof provided that the respondent shall be fully and individually responsible for carrying out the business of the firm. Clause 7 provided for the profit sharing wherein the petitioner was to be paid a minimum of Rs. 12000/- per month in the first year ending on 31.03.2009 and Rs. 15000/- per month in the second year and thereafter the monthly payment was to be increased by 10% every year or 52% of the share of profits, whichever is higher. As per clause 9, respondent was also made responsible to keep proper books of accounts of the business and the petitioner was given right to see the books of accounts at any time.

(3.) It is contended that prior to the said deed and at the beginning the petitioner's father Late Hari Ram Raheja and respondent formed a partnership firm aforesaid vide partnership deed dated 03.07.1987 to carry on the business of stationary. Thereafter w.e.f. 01.04.1992, a new partnership deed was made between them to vary the terms and conditions of the said partnership deed. Thereafter, a fresh deed of partnership was executed between late Hari Ram Raheja and respondent vide partnership deed dated 05.09.2008, whereby the petitioner was inducted as partner in the said firm. Before, petitioner's induction as partner in the said firm, the late Hari Ram Raheja and respondent had disputes amongst themselves and thus to resolve the disputes, two memorandum of understanding dated 25.04.2008 and 11.10.2008 were executed between themselves. As per the said MOUs, the respondent had been put to strict terms and conditions to carry on the business of the firm. The petitioner was not tendered the payments due to him since 31.08.2009 and was paid less amount than stipulated in the partnership deed prior to the said date. The respondent defaulted to pay the petitioner in violation of terms of partnership deed dated 14.02.2009 and previous deeds and MOUs executed by him. The details of the default in payment totalling to Rs.16,38,672 is summarised in tabular form in para 7C of the memo of application.