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

2004 Supreme(J&K) 321

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT SRINAGAR
Hakim Imtiyaz Hussain, J.
Kashmiri Lal Kapoor - Appellant
Versus
Kailash Chander Kapoor & Ors. - Respondent
CIMA No. 15/2000 c/w CIMA No. 37/2002
Decided On : 23 November, 2004

Advocates Appeared:
Advocate For Appellant: Tassaduq Hussain Khawaja
Advocate For Respondent: B.A. Rather

The main legal point established in the judgment is that an Arbitrator must comply with the provisions of the Partnership Act, provide due notice to the parties, and issue a clear and certain award.

Headnote:

Arbitration Act - Partnership Dispute - Section 39 - The judgment and decree of the learned IIIrd Addl. District Judge Srinagar dated 1.1.2000 refused to set aside the award passed by Shri H.S.Oberoi, Advocate dated 30.7.1991 in a case titled Arbitration Application No.60/Numbri. The business dispute arose between the partners of M/S Kashmir House, a commission agent business, leading to a partnership dissolution and subsequent arbitration. The court analyzed the issues of serious errors in the award, misconduct in proceedings, exparte proceedings, time-barred claims, extraneous material, and vagueness of the award.

Fact of the Case:

Partners of M/S Kashmir House, a commission agent business, entered into a fresh partnership deed after the death of a partner. Disputes arose, leading to a partnership dissolution and subsequent arbitration. The defendants objected to the arbitration proceedings, leading to a legal battle.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the Arbitrator had failed to comply with the provisions of the Partnership Act, proceeded exparte without due notice, and made a vague and uncertain award. The court set aside the judgment and decree and remanded the matter to the Court of Principal District and Sessions Judge Srinagar for fresh arbitration proceedings.

Issues: The court analyzed the issues of serious errors in the award, misconduct in proceedings, exparte proceedings, time-barred claims, extraneous material, and vagueness of the award.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Arbitrator's failure to comply with the provisions of the Partnership Act, proceeding exparte without due notice, and making a vague and uncertain award led to setting aside the judgment and decree.

Final Decision: The judgment and decree under challenge were set aside, and the matter was remanded to the Court of Principal District and Sessions Judge Srinagar for fresh arbitration proceedings.

These two appeals under Section 39 of the Arbitration Act are directed against the judgement and decree of the learned. IIIrd Addl. District Judge Srinagar dated 1.1.2000 whereby he has refused to set aside the award passed by Shri H.S.Oberoi, Advocate dated 30.7.1991 in a case titled Arbitration Application No.60/Numbri.

2. Kashmiri Lal Kapoor, (Appellant) and Kailash Chander Kapoor, C.B.Sethi, and Satish Chander Kapoor (Respondents) were carrying on business as commission agents and also as sole commission agents of Raymond Bombay in J & K under the name and style of M/S Kashmir House at Amirakadal, Srinagar. The business also included purchase and sale of cloth and yarn. Their business in fact started in the year 1968 when they entered into partnership with one Harbans Lal Anand who later on expired on 29.9.1976 due to which these partners entered into a fresh partnership and executed a new partnership deed on 29.1.1977. As per the new deed the partnership was deemed to have commenced from 30.9.1976. The shares of the parties in the profit and loss of the partnership business, as per the new partnership deed dated 29-1-1977 were as under: -

"Shri Kashmiri Lal Kapoor, party of the Ist Part: 28%

Shri Kailash Chander Kapoor, party of 2nd Part: 19%

Shri Satish Chander Kapoor, party of the 3rd part: 19%

Shri C.B.Sethi, party of the 4th part: 34%

3. It was further provided in the partnership deed that the good will of partnership business shall belong to S/Shri Kashmiri Lal Kapoor, Kailash Chander Kapoor, and Satish Chander Kapoor only and that other parties to the deed shall have no claim or interest whatsoever therein. It was also provided that the business of the partnership shall continue to be of commission agents, purchase and sale of cloth or yarn business or of any other nature which the parties shall decide to do from time to time. The partnership was made as partnership at will and it was provided that all disputes, differences and questions whatsoever regarding the partnership business shall be decided by reference to the Arbitration.

4. It appears that the business went smoothly for some time when in the year 1981 difference emerged between the partners and they fell apart. Satish Chander Kapoor sent a notice on 3.7.1981 to other partners of the firm expressing his intention to determine the partnership and asked them to settle the accounts with him failing which he shall be forced to approach the appropriate forum including the Court. The notice was sent through Mr. B.A.Bashir, counsel for Satish Chander Kapoor. The relevant part of the notice reads as under:

"My client, Shri Satish Chander Kapoor S/o Shri Gobind Ram Kapoor one amongst the four (4) partners of the Firm "M/S Kashmir House", elects to determine the partnership, entered into on 29th day of January, 1977 with you and other partners, and in stipulation of the said partnership viz clause 10th of the terms and conditions, please take notice of the determination of aforesaid partnership. You please treat the limitation running from the day of issue of this notice and the partnership shall stand determined in any event, on the expiry of the limitation set in the partnership deed. Meanwhile, the accounts should get settled with my client.

In the event of shirking from settlement of accounts or in any way mutilating the accounts to the determent of my client, please take further notice that the cost incurred on bringing you to an settlement which may include approaching any forum including Courts, shall be borne by you and the damages incurred in such a process shall be an additional burden to be shared exclusively by you."

5. The partners did not respond to the notice consequently Satish Chander Kapoor filed a suit for rendition of accounts before the Court of District Judge Srinagar on 8.5.1982. The suit was assigned to the Addl. District Judge Srinagar. The defendants in the said suit namely C.B.Sethi and Kashmiri Lal Kapoor appeared before the Court and invoked A

















































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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 Back to top