A partnership firm must be registered with the Registrar of Firms under Section 69 of the Partnership Act before instituting any suit to enforce a right arising from a contract, including a petition under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act.

( 1 ) THIS is a petition under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act wherein the petitioner had alleged that the petitioner is a partnership firm and they were awarded the work of construction of factory building and ancilliary building at Bawal (Haryana ). According to the petitioner an agreement of M/s. Build India System Construction which had already been executed by the employer/respondent No, 1 was to be executed under the same terms and conditions and rates by the petitioner and the work was to be executed under the supervision of respdent. No. 2. It is further alleged that the respondent No. 1 had invited and acceped the tender submitted by M/s. Build. India Construction System Limited who had left the work after completing the work upto plinth level only and the balance work was thereafter given to the petitioner on the same terms and conditions contained in the said tender as a consequence of the letter of acceptance by respondent No. 2.

( 2 ) DIFFERENCES having arisen between the parties the present petition was filed seeking filing of the arbitration agreement in the court and reference of the disputes to the arbitrator. The said petition had been opposed by the respondents.

( 3 ) THAT respondent No. 1 has raised, inter alia, a preliminary objection relating to the maintainability of the petition, on account of the petitioner being not registered with the Registrar of Firms under Sectron 69 of the Partnership Act. Since this objection went to the root of the matter. I proceeded to hear the arguments on this question first.

( 4 ) IN the course of arguments at the bar, my attention was drawn to the Form-B which had been filed with the petition, which clearly showed that the partnership was registered with the Registrar of Firm in. the year 1992, whereas the present petition has been field in early April, 1991. The consequence of non-registration on the date of institution is provided in Section 69 of the said Act, sub-section (2) whereof reads as under : -

"sec. 69 (2 ). No suit to enforce a right arisen from contract shall be instituted in any court by or on behalf of the firm against any third party unless the firm is registered and the persons suing are or have been shown in the Register of Firms as partners in the firm. "

( 5 ) IT is also not disputed that a petition under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act has to be tried like a suit. While it is correct that it is not a pre-condition that the firm should be registered for entering into any contract, but it is mandatory requirement that the firm should be registered with the Registrar of firm and the persons suing are or have been shown in the Registrar of Firms as partners in the firm before any suit to enforce a right is brought by the firm.

( 6 ) IN Loonkaran Sethia etc. Vs. Mr. Ivan E. John and others etc. reported as AIR 1977 SC 336 (1), the Hon ble Supreme Court has held that the provisions of Section 69 are mandatory in character and its effect is to render a suit by a plaintiff in respect of a right vested in him or acquired by him under a contract which be entered into as a partner of an unregistered firm, whether existing or dissolved, void. What is material is that on the date of institution of the suit the partnership should have been registered failing that the suit would fail. In Shankar Housing Corporation Vs. Smt. Mohan Devi and others reported as AIR 1978 Delhi 255 (2) a Division Bench of this Court had. also taken the following view :

"the point of time contemplated in Section 69 (2) is at the time of the institution of the suit. That is to today, the firm must be a registered firm by the date of the institution of the suit and the persons suing (i. e. , all the partners) must have been shown in the Register of Firms as partners of the firm by the date erf the institution of the suit. Sub-Sections (1) and (2) of S. 69 are substantive provisions intended to discourage the non-registration of firms. The provision in S. 89 (2) is mandatory