SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1993 Supreme(Cal) 60

S.K.MUKHERJEE, N.K.BHATTACHARYYA
SANTOSH KUMAR BANERJEE – Appellant
Versus
SIDHESWAR BANERJEE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
BHASKAR BHATTACHARYA

S. K. MUKHERJEE,Nripendra KUMAR BHATTACHARYYA

( 1 ) BY this revision the defendant challenged the impugned order No. 38 dated 10. 7. 92 passed in T. S. 52 of 1991 by the learned Assistant District Judge, Alipore, appointing a receiver.

( 2 ) OVER the ancestral restaurant business under the name and style "caf?", the two brothers viz. the plaintiff and the defendant entered into a partnership agreement dated 1st August, 1976. As the plaintiff worked elsewhere for gain and could not engage full time for looking after the said restaurant business and as the defendant engaged full time for management of the said restaurant business, their allegation of shares was to the extent of 45% and 55% respectively. The business ran smoothly upto January, 1991 but from February, 1991, a dispute arose regarding the management and accounts of the business. In that agreement there was a clause for arbitration. As the defendant refused to send the matter to arbitration, the plaintiff made an application under section 20 of the Arbitration Act before the learned trial Court for filing the agreement in Court, for referring the matter to arbitration, for injunction, receiver, inspection of accounts, et










Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top