Introduction

1.1 The central issue in these matters concerns an application being I.A. No. 22587 of 2014 filed by the Legal Representatives (LRs) of late Mr H. S. Vedi under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 (CPC) praying that the suit and the companion petition arising out of arbitration proceedings be disposed of in terms of a Compromise Deed dated 28th October 2007 executed by the parties.

1.2 If the said application is allowed, it will bring the curtain down on a three decade old litigation. If on the other hand, as contended by Mr K.S. Kler, the said application does not purport to settle the disputes between him and late Mr Vedi, but only the disputes both of them had with Mrs Veena Duggal, then the Court will have to decide the objections of the LRs of Mr Vedi to an Award dated 17th December 1987.

1.3 For the reasons to follow, this judgment concludes that the Compromise Deed dated 28th October 2007 brings an end to all disputes between the parties, including the disputes inter se between Mr Vedi and Mr Kler. The Court holds that the earlier Award dated 17th December 1987 does not survive and that both the suit and the petition and other applications stand disposed of in terms of the said Compromise Deed.

Background facts

2. Mr. K. S. Kler [the Plaintiff in CS (OS) No. 415-A of 1988 and Respondent No. 1 in OMP No. 147 of 1987], late Mr. H.S. Vedi (Defendant in CS (OS) No. 415-A of 1988 and the Petitioner in OMP No. 147 of 1987] and late Mr. K.K. Duggal were friends since the time they were students of architecture. They started a joint business in various countries including India, Sharjah, Bahrain, Iraq and Kuwait. All three were qualified Architects.

3. A Deed of Partnership dated 1st January, 1975 was executed between the three partners in respect of the firm under the name of ‘Architectural Construction Team and Gulf Design Group’ at Sharjah. A Supplementary Partnership Deed was executed on 1st July, 1983 between the three partners with the purpose of transferring the business of ‘Architectural Construction Team and Gulf Design Group’ to ACT Holdings (Jersey), which was incorporated in Jersey (England). It is stated that under Clause 17 of the Partnership Deed dated 1st July, 1983, it was provided that in the event of a partner dying, the surviving partners were to carry on the business and hold the share of the deceased partner’s interest for the benefit of the children and widow of the deceased partner. Clause 19 contained an arbitration clause whereby disputes arising out of or in relation to the conduct of the business of the partnership were to be referred to arbitration by mutual agreement of the parties concerned.

4. On or about 7th April 1978, a firm under the name and style of Bucheery ACT Company WLL, a joint venture of the three with one Ali Mohd. Haji Bucheery was registered in Bahrain. The Architectural Construction Company was registered in Iraq.

5. It is stated that Mr. Duggal died in a car accident near Rampur in Uttar Pradesh on 26th May, 1985. He left behind his widow, Mrs. Veena Duggal, and three minor daughters. In terms of the aforementioned Partnership Deed, Mrs. Veena Duggal became a partner/share holder in the firm.

Mrs Duggal's suits

6. Mrs. Veena Duggal filed Suit No. 2079 of 1986 in October 1986 in this Court seeking rendition of accounts of the partnership firm Architectural Construction Team and the company ACT Holdings (Jersey) Ltd. In the said suit, Mr. K.S. Kler filed an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 (‘the 1940 Act’) seeking stay and reference of the disputes to arbitration.

7. Thereafter, Mrs. Veena Duggal filed another suit being Suit No. 2312-A of 1986 under Section 20 of the 1940 Act for reference of the disputes arising out of the business of ACT Holdings (Jersey) Ltd. to arbitration A third suit being Suit No. 2313-A of 1986 was filed by Mrs. Veena Duggal under Section 20 of the 1940 Act for reference of the disputes arising betwee