M/S. S. R. Thombre, Through Its ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 17187 Bom

                                     1                              wp 13605.21

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                   BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                     WRIT PETITION NO. 13605 OF 2021

          M/s S. R. Thombre through its Partner
          Prashant Bhausaheb Thombre                    ..   Petitioner

                   Versus

          The State of Maharashtra and others           ..   Respondents

 Shri Prakash B. Paithankar, Advocate for the Petitioner.
 Shri P. K. Lakhotiya, A.G.P. for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2.

                           CORAM :    S. V. GANGAPURWALA AND
                                      S. G. DIGE, JJ.
                               DATE : 09TH DECEMBER, 2021.

 ORDER :

. Heard Mr. Paithankar, the learned advocate for the petitioner. The learned advocate submits that, the respondent No. 3 has filled in tender in its name as a partnership firm. The partnership document produced by the respondent No. 3 partnership firm consists of two individual partners and one partnership firm. According to the learned counsel, the partnership firm cannot be a partner of any partnership firm comprising of individual and a partnership firm. The learned counsel relies on the judgment of the Apex Court in a case of Dulichand Laxminarayan Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Nagpur reported in 1956 AIR (SC) 354 and the judgment of the learned Single Judge of this Court in a case of Janardhan Narsingh Mahajan Vs. Messers Makhija Vohra Builders dated 09.01.2020

2 wp 13605.21

in Writ Petition No. 6324 of 1999. It is also further submitted that, the respondent No. 3 does not possess necessary experience, nor possess necessary machinery.

2. The learned Assistant Government Pleader places reliance on the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in a case of Chhotelal Devchand, Bombay Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City reported in 1959 AIR (Bom) 152.

3. The partnership deed placed on record of the respondent No. 3/partnership firm includes two individuals Mr. Kuldeepsing Dipaksingh Pardeshi and Mr. Digvijaysing Deepaksinh Pardeshi. It also includes third member as partner M/s. R. R. Kapoor (partnership firm). Affidavit annexed with the tender document of Mr. Rishi Kapoor suggest that M/s R. R. Kapoor is his proprietary firm.

4. There is no document suggesting M/s R. R. Kapoor being registered as a partnership firm. The certificate of enrollment under sub Section 2 of Section 2A of Section 05 of the Maharashtra State Tax on Profession, Trades Calling Employment Act, 1975 is registered. It appears individually in the name of Mr. R. R. Kapoor.

5. Issue notice to respondents, returnable on 16.12.2021. The learned A. G. P. waives notice for respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Humdast allowed.

3 wp 13605.21

6. Any further process undertaken would be subject to the decision in the present writ petition.

       [S. G. DIGE, J.]            [S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J.]

 bsb/Dec.21