HEMANT GUPTA, J. - (1.) PETITIONERS have sought appointment of an Arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the parties arising out of the partnership deed dated 6.8.2004 (Annexure P-1).
(2.) THE partnership is at will and contains the following arbitration clause to resolve the disputes between the parties:- 13. That in case of any difference amongst the partners with regard to this partnership, the matter shall be referred to and got decided by Arbitration in accordance with the provisions of Indian Arbitration Act, in force. Petitioners have averred that the respondent has filed a petition for dissolution of partnership firm before the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Jagadhri. In the said petition, the respondent has asserted that the disputes are required to be resolved by way of arbitration. THE said application is stated to be still pending. Learned counsel for the respondent has raised a preliminary objection that in term of Section 44 of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932 (for short the Act), the Court alone can order dissolution of firm and that the arbitrator cannot order dissolution of a partnership firm. Therefore, the present application before this Court is not maintainable. In support of such arguments, learned counsel for respondent has referred to two judgments of this Court reported as B.K.Kapoor & anr vs. Mrs. Tajinder Kapoor & anr, 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 649 (P&H) and M/s Sharda Ginning Pressing & Oil Mills and ors vs. Smt. Bimla Devi, 2007(2) PLR 807.
(3.) ON the other hand, learned counsel for the petitioners has referred to a judgment of Honble Supreme Court reported as Booz Allen and Hamilton Inc. v. SBI Home Finance Limited, (2011) 5 SCC 532; Olympus Superstructures (P) Ltd. v. Meena Vijay Khetan, (1999) 5 SCC 651 and V.H.Patel & Company and others vs. Hirubhai Himabhai Patel and ors, (2000) 4 SCC 368. Reference is also made to Mahendra Kumar Poddar vs. M/s Bansal Builders and ors, AIR 2001 Calcutta 58 and J.B.Dadachanji Vs. Ravinder Narain 2002(4) R.C.R.(Civil) 7 (Delhi), wherein, the learned Single Bench of Calcutta and Delhi High Court have taken a view that the arbitrator is competent to dissolve a partnership firm. The petitioners have also relied upon a recent Single Bench judgment reported as Rajinder Prasad Goyal vs. Royal Orchid Company and ors 2011(3)PLR 266 to contend that the arbitrator was found entitled to examine the question of dissolution of the firm.;