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

2023 Supreme(Del) 5642

MANMOHAN, MINI PUSHKARNA
Scj Colours – Appellant
Versus
P R Technoplast Pvt Ltd – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
Mr.Pankaj Chaudhary, Advocate, for the Appellant.

JUDGMENT

Manmohan, J. (Oral) - Present appeal has been filed challenging the order dated 18th November, 2022 passed by the learned District Judge, (Commercial Court), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in CS(COMM) No.79/2020.

2. Since despite service of notice, none appeared for the respondents, they were proceeded ex parte on 28th August, 2023. It is pertinent to mention that even before the Trial Court, the respondents were proceeded ex parte. Consequently, this Court has no other option but to proceed ahead with the matter.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant states the Trial Court has dismissed the suit filed by the appellant under Section 69(2) of the Partnership Act, 1932 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') based on an incorrect conclusion that the subsequent registration of the partnership firm would not cure the initial defect of filing of the suit by an unregistered firm.

4. He contends that the Trial Court failed to appreciate that the appellant was duly registered with the Registrar of Firms, Delhi vide Certificate No.FIRM/WEST/2018/1534 of 2018 dated 26th December, 2018 and the suit in the present instance was filed on 03rd February, 2020 i.e. after the registration of the appell

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