P.B.SURESH KUMAR, C.S.SUDHA
P. k. kamala, w/o. Late P. V. Balakrishnan nair – Appellant
Versus
P. K. Manoharan,S/O. Late P. V. Balakrishnan Nair – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
C.S.Sudha, J.
1. Lack of consensus among the partners, who are not strangers but mother and three children with the mother and two daughters on one side and the only son on the other side, in the matter of sharing profits of their partnership firms, initially constituted by their predecessor-in-interest, P.V. Balakrishnan Nair, led to the arbitration proceedings. Not happy with the award passed by the sole Arbitrator, the son and grandson, the latter subsequently impleaded, moved the District Court, Ernakulam under S.34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (the Act). The District Court set aside the award partly. Aggrieved by the same the mother and son are before this Court in the present appeals.
2. P.V. Balakrishnan Nair and Kamala had three children, namely, Manoharan, Krishna Kumari and Sreelatha. Among the various business concerns started by the patriarch, there were three partnership firms, namely, Raja Rajeswari Weaving Mills (the Mills); Kamala International Tourist Hotel (the Hotel) and Raja Rajeswari City (the City). The patriarch passed away in the year 1999. Kamala and her three children are partners in the aforesaid three firms. Admittedly, the son,
National Insurance Co.Ltd.v. Boghata Polyfab Private Limited
SBP & Co. v. Patel Engineering Ltd.
Indowind Energy Ltd. v. Wescare (India) Ltd. [(2010) 5 SCC 306 ]
Chloro Controls (I) Pvt. Ltd. v. Seven Trent Water Purification Inc.
Cheran Properties Ltd. v. Kasturi & Sons Ltd. [(2018)16 SCC 413]
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.