JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) Leave granted.
This appeal by special leave is filed against the order
dated 27.10.2005 passed by the Delhi High Court under section
11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ('Act' for
short) in Arbitration Application No.200 of 2005 and the order
dated 9.12.2005 rejecting the application for review.
(2.) The appellant and respondents 3 and 4, carrying on
business in partnership under the name and style of 'Matchless
Industries of India' (5th respondent herein), entered into a
partnership with Respondents 1 and 2, as per deed of
partnership dated 1.3.1995 to carry on the business under the
name and style of M/s. Controls and Matchless Industries.
Appellant, Respondent No. 3 and Respondent No. 4 as partners
of 'Matchless Industries of India' were together shown as the
first party to the partnership and Respondents 1 and 2 together
were shown as the second party to the partnership. Clause (14)
thereof provided for settlement of disputes among the partners
by arbitration and the same is reproduced hereinbelow :
"Any dispute or difference which may arise between the
partners or their representatives with regard to the
construction, meaning and effect to this deed or any part
thereof or respecting the accounts, profit or losses of the
business or the rights and liabilities of the partners under
this deed or the dissolution or winding up of the business of
the partnership or any other matter relating to the firm shall
be referred to arbitration of sole arbitrator in accordance
with the provisions of the Indian Arbitration Act."
(3.) The said firm was dissolved as per deed dated
24.12.2001. It is stated that certain disputes arose between the
parties in connection with certain claims by Respondents 1 and
2 on dissolution of the said firm of M/s Controls and Matchless
Industries. Respondents 1 and 2 sent a communicated dated
22.8.2003 to the appellant and respondents 3 to 5 seeking
'accounts'. The fourth respondent sent a letter dated 17.12.2003
on the letterhead of 'Matchless Industries of India' stating that
he would ensure that a sum of Rs.53,81,585/- is paid to
respondents 1 and 2. Thereafter, respondents 1 and 2 sent a
notice dated 27.6.2005 to appellant and respondents 3 to 5,
claiming that the amounts mentioned therein were due to them
and sought concurrence for the appointment of Mr. Abhinav
Vasisht, Advocate, as sole arbitrator, to decide the dispute. The
appellant sent a reply dated 21.7.2005 contending that there
cannot be any arbitration as the Dissolution Deed did not
contain any arbitration clause.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.