Disposed

Reema Anurag Gupta and Anr. v. Sushil Kumar Gupta and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC2 Mar 2012ARB/45/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment appoints an arbitrator to adjudicate disputes arising from a partnership firm following one partner's death. The court resolved the issue of disqualification or prior determination by ordering the appointment of a retired District Judge as arbitrator with fee terms.

What did the court decide?

Appointment of L.R. Roojam as Arbitrator to adjudicate disputes regarding the partnership firm.

Reema Anurag Gupta and Anr. Vs Sushil Kumar Gupta and… — Arbitration | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

Arbitration Case No.45 of 2011

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Arbitration Case No.45 of 2011

¶5

Date of Decision : 02.03.2012

¶6

Ms. Reema Anurag Gupta & another

¶7

...Petitioners

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sushil Kumar Gupta & others

¶10

...Respondents

¶11

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA

¶12

Present: Mr. Jaswinder Singh, Advocate, for the petitioners.

¶13

Mr. Atul Lakhanpal, Sr. Advocate, with Mr. R.S.Chahal, Advocate, for the respondents.

¶14

HEMANT GUPTA, J. (Oral)

¶15

The petitioners have sought appointment of an Arbitrator to resolve the disputes after the death of Anurag Gupta, a partner of the firm M/s Raj Rajeshwari Builders in terms of partnership deed dated 06.06.1994.

¶16

Anurag Gupta, one of the partners of the aforesaid partnership firm died on 29.7.2004. Earlier, the petitioners filed a suit for rendition of accounts of the partnership firm in which the respondents filed an application under Section 8 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 in view of the arbitration clause contained in the aforesaid partnership deed. The said application was allowed vide order dated 03.02.2010, and the suit of the petitioners for rendition of accounts was dismissed. Thereafter, the petitioners have invoked the jurisdiction of this Court for appointment of an Arbitrator after serving a legal notice dated 12.01.2011 (Annexure P-7), wherein the petitioners have sought the examination of

¶17

Arbitration Case No.45 of 2011

¶18

¶19

the accounts books and also that the respondents have not taken any step for appointment of an Arbitrator for settlement of claims of the petitioners.

¶20

In the written statement filed, the respondents have referred to dissolution deed dated 01.08.1999, wherein the partnership is said to have been dissolved with Anurag Gupta. It is, thus, sought to be contended that there is no dispute in respect of affiars of the firm in which Anurag Gupta was the partner prior to his death.

¶21

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. The petitioners have denied the execution of dissolution deed dated 01.08.1999. It is contended that in the suit for rendition of accounts filed by the petitioner, the respondent have not asserted that there was a dissolution of partnership. Therefore, the disputes; whether the dissolution deed dated 01.08.1999 was executed or whether the petitioners have any share in the firm constituted vide partnership deed dated 06.06.1994, are required to be decided by an Arbitrator.

¶22

Consequently, Mr. L.R.Roojam, District & Sessions Judge (Retd.), now Member, Punjab Human Rights Commission, SCO Nos.2022, Sector 34-A, Chandigarh, is appointed as an Arbitrator to adjudicate upon all the disputes between the parties arising out of partnership deed dated 06.06.1994 after the death of Anurag Gupta. The Arbitrator shall be entitled to fix his own fee which shall not exceed the fee as per the Punjab & Haryana High Court (Arbitrators’ Panel & Fee) Rules, 2011.

¶23

Disposed of.

¶24

(HEMANT GUPTA) JUDGE

¶25

02.03.2012 Vimal

Reema Anurag Gupta and Anr. v. Sushil Kumar Gupta and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Reema Anurag Gupta and Anr. v. Sushil Kumar Gupta and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

State of Punjab etc. Vs Mohan Singh etc.

(O&M) Fateh Singh etc. Vs State of Haryana etc.

Punjab Wakf Board, Ambala Cantt Vs Jai Ram

M/S Gawar Construction Co. Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

M/S Skylark Cagers International Vs Post Graduate Institute of Medical Edu. and Researech

M/S Skylark Cagers International Vs Post Graduate Institute of Medical Edu. and Researech