Allowed

P.C.James v. Kairali Chits and Financers

Kerala HC16 Dec 2011AR/29/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an arbitration request, the High Court appointed an arbitrator after ascertaining that both parties agreed to arbitrate a dispute arising from a partnership relationship involving maintenance costs and account discrepancies, dispensing with the earlier requirement of a review petition.

What did the court decide?

Sri. A. Haridasan appointed as the arbitrator to arbitrate the disputes.

P.C.James Vs Kairali Chits and Financers — Arbitration | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 16TH DECEMBER 2011 / 25TH AGRAHAYANA 1933

¶5

AR.No. 29 of 2011() --------------------------

¶6

PETITIONER (S):

¶7

-------------------------

¶8

P.C.JAMES, AGED 51, S/O.PARAPPAN CHAKKU, KODUNGA DESOM, VELLIKULANGARA VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK.

¶9

BY ADVS. SRI.S.EASWARAN

¶10

SRI.P.MURALEEDHARAN (IRIMPANAM) SRI.M.A.AUGUSTINE

¶11

RESPONDENT(S):

¶12

-------------------------

¶13

KAIRALI CHITS & FINANCIERS, REG.NO.1954/2000, VELLIKULANGARA, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER SRI.NANDAKUMAR.

¶14

BY ADV. SRI.T.N.MANOJ

¶15

THIS ARBITRATION REQUEST HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

VPV

ARNO.29/2011

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶20

EXT.P1:	COPY OF PARTNERSHIP DEED DATED 3.7.2000 EXECUTED BY THE RESPONDENT AND ITS PARTNERS.
EXT.P2:	COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 2.3.2007 N O.S.NO.106 OF 2006 OF THE COURT OF THE SUBORDINATE JUDGE, IRINJALAKUDA.
EXT.P3:	COPY OF NOTICE DATED 25.1.2011 SENT BY THE APPLICANT TO THE RESPONDENT.

¶21

EXT.P4: COPY OF REPLY NOTICE DATED 3.2.2011 SENT TO THE APPLICANT BY THE COUNSEL ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT.

¶22

RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES:

¶23

ANNEX.(A):	COPY OF PETITION SEEKING REVIEW OF THE JUDGMENT IN OS 106/2006.
ANNEX.(B):	COPY OF THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT ALONG WITH THE BALANCE SHEET FOR THE YEAR 2001.
ANNEX.B(1):	COPY OF THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT ALONG WITH THE BALANCE SHEET FOR THE YEAR 2002.
ANNEX.B(2):	COPY OF THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT ALONG WITH THE BALANCE SHEET FOR THE YEAR 2003.
ANNEX.B(3):	COPY OF THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT ALONG WITH THE BALANCE SHEET FOR THE YEAR 2004.
ANNEX.B(4):	COPY OF THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT ALONG WITH THE BALANCE SHEET FOR THE YEAR 2005.
ANNEX.B(5):	COPY OF THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT ALONG WITH THE BALANCE SHEET FOR THE YEAR 2008.
ANNEX.B(6):	COPY OF THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT ALONG WITH THE BALANCE SHEET FOR THE YEAR 2009.
ANNEX.B(7):	COPY OF THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT ALONG WITH THE BALANCE SHEET FOR THE YEAR 2010.
ANNEX.(C):	COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT FILED IN OS 106/2006.
ANNEX.(D):	COPY OF THE REPLY NOTICE DATED 2.11.2010.

/TRUE COPY/

P.A. TO JUDGE

VPV

S. SIRI JAGAN, J.

¶28

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - A.R. No. 29 of 2011

¶29

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 16^th day of December, 2011

¶30

O R D E R

¶31

The applicant is a partner of the opposite party partnership firm. Certain disputes have arisen between them. In respect thereof, the applicant filed a suit as O.S. No.106/2006 before the Additional Subordinate Judges Court, Irinjalakuda. In that suit, the respondent took the contention that the partnership deed contains an arbitration clause and therefore the suit is not maintainable. Accepting that contention, by Ext.P2 judgment, the Sub Court dismissed the suit holding that the remedy of the applicant is to seek reference for arbitration. The applicant filed a review petition against that judgment. It is pending that review petition, the petitioner has filed this arbitration request. But the applicant has now produced before me a copy of the judgment of the Sub Court, whereby the review petition has been dismissed as not pressed. The applicant now seeks appointment of an arbitrator as per the

¶32

A.R. No. 29 of 2011

¶33

-2-

¶34

arbitration clause relied on by the respondent themselves in the suit. Although the respondent has filed a counter affidavit taking the stand that arbitration cannot be resorted to, it is now submitted by the counsel for the respondent that the respondent also agrees for arbitration. In the above circumstances, as agreed to by both sides, I appoint Sri. A. Haridasan, former District Judge, Plot No.237, Hill Garden Housing Colony, Kuttanellur, Thrissur-14, as the Arbitrator to arbitrate the disputes between the applicant and the respondent.

¶35

The arbitration request is disposed of as above.

¶36

Sd/S. SIRI JAGAN JUDGE //True copy//

¶37

P.A. TO JUDGE

¶38

shg/

P.C.James v. Kairali Chits and Financers

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.C.James v. Kairali Chits and Financers

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Regi Jose Vs Kuriakose Padavan

Regional Manager, Central Bank of India Vs B.Premkumar

Manager, H.L.P.S., Malesamangalam Vs State of Kerala and Others

M.P.Thankamma Vs the Registrar(General)

M/S.Wipro Ge Healthcare Pvt.Ltd. Vs the Commercial Tax Inspector

C.K.Abdul Khader Vs Intelligence Inspector