R.L.ANAND, J. - (1.) THIS is Civil Revision and has been directed against the order dated 3.11.1999 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Ludhiana, who allowed the appeal by setting aside the order dated 17.1.1996 passed by the Sub Judge Ist Class, Ludhiana, who dismissed the application of the plaintiff-respondent under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 C.P.C.
(2.) SOME facts can be noticed in the following manner : Sanjiv Goyal, plaintiff-respondent, filed a suit for declaration that the plaintiff and defendants Nos. 2 and 3 are the only continuing partners of the firm M/s Monika India and defendant No. 1, expressed his intention by serving a notice telegraphically to retire from the partnership on determination of his share in the assets and liabilities of the firm and for grant of permanent injunction restraining defendant No. 1 from interfering in the working, management and control of the continuing partners over business and assets of the firm till the matter is determined by the arbitrator to be appointed to settle the modality of retirement pursuant to clause No. 15 of the partnership deed dated 1.4.1987. The case of the plaintiff further is that on 9.8.1993 defendant No. 1 Shri H.L. Goyal, through his lawyer Shri Parveen Garg Advocate served a notice to the other partners of the plaintiff to the following effect :- "You and my client Hira Lal Goyal son of Jagat Ram Goyal partners in firm M/s Monika India vide partnership deed dated 1.4.198. You not conduct yourself faithfully towards my client. You created bogus documents and got filed suit through Mr. Rohit Sharma allegedly on behalf of G. Canon Steel Pvt. Ltd. You misappropriating, dissipating, embezzling assets and funds of the firm. You fabricated documents and entries in account books. You not allowing my client to enjoy partnership assets under the garb of stay order granted by the Senior Sub Judge, Ludhiana. My client has lost complete faith in you. My client hereby dissolves the firm as a whole. Stop transacting any business in the name of the firm. Stop operating bank accounts etc. Stop utilising name of the firm. You liable to render accounts as you in possession of all the assets and name of the firm otherwise legal action. Registered notice follows :- Parveen Garg Advocate." Thus, the reading of the above would who that Shri Hira Lal Goyal- defendant No. 1 clearly expressed his intention that he wanted to dissolve the firm as a whole. The firm came into existence with effect from 1.4.1987 and in his manner the business of the firm shall be deemed to have been continued only up to 9.8.1993 on which date the partnership stood dissolved and the new partnership in the name of M/s Monika India came into existence with the remaining partners. The rights and liabilities of the outgoing partners in these circumstances, have to be determined up to 9.8.1993 with effect from 1.4.1987. It is the case of the plaintiff that these rights may be adjudicated by the Arbitrator.
(3.) DURING the course of submissions, both the parties have agreed that let Hon'ble Mr. Justice D.V. Sehgal (Retd.) may be appointed as Arbitrator, who will adjudicate the rights and regard to the rights and liabilities of M/s Monika India with effect from 1.4.1987 up to 9.8.1993 only. I order accordingly. The fee of the Arbitrator tentatively is fixed at Rs. 20,000/-, which shall be contributed equally by both the parties. A copy of this order be sent to Hon'ble Mr. Justice D.V. Sehgal (Retd.) who is suggested to enter into the arbitration and dispose of the matter according to law. The copy of the order be also given desti to both the parties. Order accordingly.;