Back
ARAVIND KUMAR, ASHUTOSH J. SHASTRI
Dhanesh Bhadarmal Jain – Appellant
Versus
Registrar Of Firm – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Aravind Kumar, J.
1. Though the matter is listed for admission, the learned advocates appearing for the appellants and the second respondent have elaborately canvassed their arguments. Hence, we have thought it fit and appropriate to dispose of this appeal particularly having bestowed precious judicial time, since adjourning this matter to any other date would not be in the interest of justice. Essentially the dispute is between second respondent and the appellants though the impugned order has been passed by the first respondent. Hence, Mr.Sahil Trivedi, learned Assistant Government Pleader has accepted and waived notice for respondent No.1.
2. In this Letters Patent Appeal, the correctness and legality of the judgment dated 15.12.2022 passed in Special Civil Application No.22223 of 2022 has been called in question.
BRIEF BACKGROUND OF THE CASE :
3. Appellants herein challenged the order dated 05.09.2022 passed by respondent No.1 whereunder first respondent herein has declared the partnership firm M/s.Samkit Infracon, having Registration No.GUJAH 1100224 as dissolved and has further ordered that said firm is being treated as dissolved.
4. The partnership firm namely M/s.Samki
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the dissolution of a partnership firm under the Indian Partnership Act, 1932, and the reconstitution of the firm are governed by specific prov....
Important PointChanges in the constitution of a firm does not affect the registration once made but information about changes have to be given and failure to comply attracts penalties u/s 69-A of the....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the dissolution of a partnership firm entitles a partner to seek settlement of accounts and interim reliefs under Section 9 of the Arbitration....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a suit filed by an unregistered partnership firm under the Indian Partnership Act, 1932 is not maintainable and is inherently defective and no....
Partners cannot unregister without due process; rights remain unless valid documents executed under the Indian Partnership Act.
The central legal point established in the judgment is that when the Registrar fails to exercise statutory duties under the Partnership Act, the court is entitled to grant a positive direction.
Court clarified validity of partnership dissolution and subsequent registrations, emphasizing the necessity of considering all relevant documents in property ownership disputes.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
