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

1970 Supreme(All) 377

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
R.B. MISRA, S.D. KHARE, JJ.
Jagannath Das - Appellant
Versus
Gokal Das - Respondent
F.A.F.O. No. 134 of 1970 connected with F.A.F.O. No. 154 of 1970 (F.A.F.O against the judgement and order of IInd Civil Judge, Varanasi, dated 20-4-1970 in Misc. Case No. 13 of 1969, O.S. No. 38 of 1969).
Decided On : 13-11-1970

Advocates appeared:
R.N. Singh, Advocate, For the Appellant / A.N. Kaul, Advocate, For the Respondents

JUDGMENT

S.D. Khare, J. - These are two connected appeals arising out of the orders passed by the learned Second Additional Civil Judge, Varanasi, on 20th April, 1970.

2. An application under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act was moved by Jagannath Das (defendant) for stay of proceedings of the regular suit No. 38 of 1969 instituted by Gokul Das against the Banaras Electric light and Power Company Ltd. and four of his brothers, including Jagannath Das. It was alleged by him that on 12th February, 1969, all the seven brothers, including the plaintiff of the suit, had agreed that all disputes between them regarding their common business be referred to the arbitration of three persons, named in the deed. It was therefore, prayed that the dispute which was the subject matter of original suit No. 38 of 1969 need not be adjudicated upon as the matter was already before the arbitrator. The learned Civil judge, after considering the objections of the parties dismissed the application. This has given rise to First appeal from order No. 134 of 1970.

3. A misc. application was moved under Section 41 of the Arbitration Act by Narain Das (Misc. No. 31 of 1969) that a receiver be appointed and the opposite party be restrained from alienating or damaging the properties, articles, cash or any other thing pertaining to Vishambhari Card-board Factory and for appointment of a vakil commissioner to prepare inventory of all the articles belonging to the business. The application was dismissed by the learned Second Additional Civil Judge, Varanasi, because of his findings arrived at in the misc. case under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act and after observing that the business of the Vishambhari Cardboard Factory was the exclusive business of Gokul Das. First appeal from order No. 154 of 1970 is directed against that order.

4. The facts of the case leading to the orders appealed against might be briefly stated as follows :-

Gokul Das and his six brothers, belonging to one and the same family, had several partnership firms of some or all the brothers. Vishambhari Cardboard Factory was one of such businesses and the partners of the firm were Jagannath Das, Gokul Das, Narain Das, Chunni La1 and Moti Lal, that is, five out of the seven brothers of Gokul Das, including Gokul Das himself. The partnership deed contained an arbitration clause. On or about 23rd January, 1969, the Banaras Electric Light and Power Co. Ltd., cut off the electric supply to Vishambhtri Cardboard Factory. The case of Gokul Das was that prior to that date the brothers had practically separated their business and Vishambhari Cardboard Factory had fallen to the exclusive share of Gokul Das. It was, however, conceded by him that accounting among the partners with regard to this business had not been done. The contention of Gokul Das was that it was at the instance of his four brothers, namely, Jagannath Das, Moti Lal, Chunni Lal and Narain Das, that the electric connection to Vishambhari Cardboard Factory had been cut off.

5. On 12th February, 1969, Gokul Das and his remaining six brothers executed an agreement for arbitration. They appointed three arbitrators, and it was stated therein that the disputes which had arisen with regard to their common business should be settled by him. The arbitrators entered into they reference and Gokul Das filed his claim before the arbitrators. However, on 11th March, 1969, Gokul Das filed a suit against the Banaras Electric Light and Power Co. Ltd. and his four brothers, who were originally his partners in Vishambhari Cardboard Factory on the ground that there had been a division of assets between them and Vishambhari Cardboard Factory had fallen to his exclusive share and damage had been caused to him because at the instance of the remaining four defendants the Banaras Electric Light and Power Co. Ltd. had cut off the electric connection.

6. There was a compromise between Gokul Das and the Banaras Electric Light and Power Co. Ltd., and the Electric

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top