Panchal Bhupendrakumar Mafatlal vs J Parihar Interior Consultants ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 4116 Guj

C/FA/2983/2018                                                        JUDGMENTDt:12/03/2021


PANCHAL BHUPENDRAKUMAR MAFATLAL vs J PARIHAR INTERIOR CONSULTANTS
PVT. LTD. & 2 other(s)

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                         R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2983 of 2018



HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI

and

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIREN VAISHNAV

=================================================================

1      Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the
       judgment ?

2      To be referred to the Reporter or not ?

3      Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the
       judgment ?

4      Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to
       the interpretation of the Constitution of India or any order made
       thereunder ?

=================================================================
                    PANCHAL BHUPENDRAKUMAR MAFATLAL
                                    Versus
1.                 J PARIHAR INTERIOR CONSULTANTS PVT. LTD.
2.                 PARIHAR JAGDISH PREMJIBHAI
3.                 PARIHAR BHARAT JAGDISHBHAI
=================================================================
Appearance:
NATASHA SUTARIA(7907) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR ANVESH V VYAS(5654) for the Defendant(s) No. 1,3
NOTICE SERVED BY DS(5) for the Defendant(s) No. 2
==========================================================

    CORAM: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI
           and
           HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIREN VAISHNAV

                                    Date : 12/03/2021

                                  ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER : HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI)

C/FA/2983/2018 JUDGMENTDt:12/03/2021

PANCHAL BHUPENDRAKUMAR MAFATLAL vs J PARIHAR INTERIOR CONSULTANTS PVT. LTD. & 2 other(s)

1. The Plaintiff has filed this Appeal aggrieved by the Order dated 30.6.2018 whereby the learned Trial Court dismissed the Suit filed by the Plaintiff on the Application filed by the Defendant under Order 7 Rule 11 (d) of the Code of Civil Procedure on the ground that the Firm was not registered under the Partnership Act, 1932 and, therefore, the Suit was barred by Section 69 of the Act.

2. Learned counsel for the Plaintiff-Appellant Ms.Natasha Sutaria submitted that the Plaintiff had executed a Contract of Interior Decoration for the Respondent-Defendant Company M/s.J Parihar Interior Consultants Pvt. Ltd. and other two Defendants namely, Parihar Jagdish Premjibhai and Parihar Bharat Jagdishbhai . The learned Trial Court has dismissed the Suit under Order 7 Rule 11 (d) of the CPC on the ground that the Plaintiff-Appellant filed a Suit to recovery the amount in question as deemed partner under the Partnership Contract which was not registered under Partnership Act and therefore, Suit was barred by Section 69 of the Act.

3. On the other hand, Mr. Anvesh Vyas, learned counsel appearing for the Defendant-Respondent submitted that the plaint averments clearly showed that the Plaintiff himself claimed to be Partner of the Partnership Firm and, therefore, in the absence of any Registration of the Partnership Firm under Section 69 of the Act, the Suit was barred.

4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we are satisfied that the impugned Order passed by learned Trial Court dated 30.6.2018 cannot be sustained and, therefore, the First Appeal filed by the Plaintiff- Appellant deserves to be allowed.

C/FA/2983/2018 JUDGMENTDt:12/03/2021

PANCHAL BHUPENDRAKUMAR MAFATLAL vs J PARIHAR INTERIOR CONSULTANTS PVT. LTD. & 2 other(s)

5. Apparently, the Defendant No.1 M/s.J Parihar Interior Consultants Pvt. Ltd. is a Private Limited Company registered under the provision of Companies Act, 1956 and, therefore, there is no question of invoking the concept of Partnership in the present case. The learned Trial Judge has missed to see the said aspect of the matter altogether.

6. The present Appeal is, therefore, allowed. The impugned Order is set aside and the trial is restored on the file of the Trial Judge to proceed further in accordance with law.

(DR. VINEET KOTHARI,J)

(BIREN VAISHNAV, J) NAIR SMITA V.