Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta, J. - (1.) Master Summons dated 1st April, 1999 has been taken out in the aforesaid Money Suit for rejection and/or dismissal and/or taking the plaint off the file. The ground for rejection is that suit is otherwise barred under law inasmuch as factually the plaintiff firm, viz, TFB (India) is rot registered under the provisions of the Partnership Act, so by operation of section 69(2) thereof suit his become barred. In the affidavit filed in support of the Master Summons a Certificate of a private intelligence agency. viz., Black Boy Detective Agency Private Limited has been annexed showing the aforesaid firm being unregistered. In the affidavit in-opposition of the plaintiff it has been stated amongst other that formerly firm was registered in the name of Bhagwan Das Manoj Kumar and this registration is continuing. Subsequently it was agreed amongst the partners that the name of the partnership firm would he changed to TFB India Accordingly, by a letter dated 26th June, 1996 statutory intimation was given to the Registrar of Firms A certified copy of the extract of Registrar of Firms showing registration of the firm has been annexed.
(2.) Mr. P C. Sen, learned Senior Counsel, appearing with Mr. Saumitra Sen, learned Counsel in support of the Master Summons submits that it will appear from the extract of Registrar of Firms that plaintiff's name, viz., TFB (India) does not find place admittedly. Therefore, the plaintiff firm is not a registered firm. He submits that provision of section 69(2) is a mandatory. Therefore the suit is wholly barred as there is no registration In support of his submissions he cites and relies on the following decisions. (i) AIR 1993 SC (Supp) 3085 and (ii) AIR 1977 SC 242.
(3.) He argues that there is no answer of the plaintiff (or the aforesaid contention and admittedly the plaintiff firm is not registered. So the suit is not maintainable.;