S.R. Brahmbhatt, J.—Heard learned advocate for the parties.

2. On 15.02.2012, this Court passed the following order;

“Learned advocate for the petitioner has submitted that the matter was slated for final disposal but there is a leave note, hence it may be placed on appropriate date. Hence, let the matter be come up on 22.02.2011.”

3. Accordingly, the matter was taken up for final disposal. Hence, Rule. Rule is waived by learned advocate for the respective parties. Rule is fixed forthwith in terms of the order made hereinabove.

4. The petitioner by way of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenged the order dated 18.12.2010 purported to have been passed in exercise of the power under Section 64 of the Indian Partnership Act, accepting the request for cancelling the entry qua one of the partner – Respondent No. 2 in respect of the constitution of partnership firm.

5. Facts in brief leading to filing this petition, as could be culled out from the memo of the petition deserve to be set out as under;

6. The petitioner is a partnership firm constituted under the Indian Partnership Act. All partners are real brothers. The petitioner alleged in the mem