Back
HARKESH MANUJA
Metal ARC Agri. LLP (M/s) – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent
Judgment
Mr. Harkesh Manuja, J.
By way of present revision petition, challenge has been made to an order dated 06.04.2023 passed by the Executing Court-cum-Additional District Judge, Faridabad, whereby an application filed at the instance of the petitioner, invoking Order 21 Rule 15 (2) read with Section 151 CPC, in pending execution, with a prayer for protecting and remittance of 11.33% share out of the decreetal amount, stands dismissed.
2. Briefly stated, 15 kanal 10 marla of land situated in village Sarai Khawaja, District Faridabad, was owned by respondent No.3-M/s Hydraulics & Pneumatics (India) Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Company’). Later by virtue of deed executed on 17.06.2013, registered on 22.06.2013, an agreement of limited liability partnership was executed in terms of Section 2(iv) of the Limited Liability Partnership Act, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as ‘2008 Act’), whereby the legal status of “the Company” was converted into limited liability partnership firm i.e. in the name of M/s Hydraulics & Pneumatics (India) LLP (hereinafter referred to as ‘LLP Firm’), with Mr. Anirudh Kumar s/o Brij Raj Kumar, having 11.33 % share therein, besides others.
3. Vide
Partners in a limited liability partnership can invoke execution provisions to protect their interests as joint decree-holders, governed by their partnership agreement.
One joint decree-holder may apply for execution for the benefit of all unless expressly stated otherwise; courts can assess intent beyond strict decree wording.
The liability of a partner in a partnership extends to actions taken by the firm, reinforced by legal precedents governing execution of decrees against firm partners.
Point of Law : As it is seen that it is nobody’s case that suit in question is a suit coming within ambit of Order XX Rule 18(2) of Code and as such question of a preliminary decree does not arise at....
Point of law: No suit to enforce a right arising from a contract shall be instituted in any Court by or on behalf of a firm against any third party unless the firm is registered and the persons suing....
An application under Order XXI Rule 58 CPC is not maintainable if the applicant fails to establish a claim to the attached property and if prior proceedings have attained finality.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a suit for partition can be barred by law and limitation if there is already a decree and final decree in place, and the plaintiff fails to en....
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
