Madras High Court
The Managing Director vs M/S. P.N.P. Constructions on 6 January, 2023
CMP No.21143 of 2022 &
W.A.No.SR 109874 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 06.01.2023
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.T.RAJA, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY
CMP No.21143 of 2022
&
Writ Appeal No.SR 109874 of 2022
1. The Managing Director
Chennai Metropolitan Water Supply and
Sewerage Board
No.75, Santhome High Road
Pattinapakkam, Santhome
Raja Annamalaipuram
Chennai 600 028.
2. The Superintending Engineer (C&M)
Chennai Metropolitan Water Supply and
Sewerage Board
No.1, Pumping Station Road Petitioners/
Chintadripet, Chennai 600 002. .. Appellants
Vs.
M/s. P.N.P. Constructions
Rep. by its Partner P.Sri Krishna Priya
Having Office at No.F/29, 7th Street
Thanikachalam Nagar, Ponniammanmedu
Chennai 600 110. .. Respondent
Page 1 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMP No.21143 of 2022 &
W.A.No.SR 109874 of 2022
Prayer: Petition under Section 5 of the Limitation Act to condone the
delay of 53 days in filing the appeal; and
(ii) Appeal under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the order
dated 13.07.2022 made in W.P.No.1411 of 2022.
For the Appellants : Mr.Gautam S.Raman
JUDGMENT
(Delivered by the Hon'ble Acting Chief Justice)
Heard the application for condonation of delay of 53 days in filing
the appeal.
2. According to learned counsel for the petitioners/appellants,
the respondent Partnership firm was registered as Works Contractor
and its status has to be renewed from time to time by the Partners by
signing in the Live Register kept in the office of the petitioner Board.
By communication dated 21.06.2021, the respondent firm was
required to sign the Live Register on 21.07.2021. However, the
Partners P.Jayaraman and P.Sri Krishna Priya had not signed the same.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMP No.21143 of 2022 &
W.A.No.SR 109874 of 2022
Thereafter, P.Jayaraman fell ill and died on 03.09.2021. Before three
days of his death, namely on 29.08.2021, a deed of Retirement cum
Admission of Partners was executed and it was signed by P.Jayaraman
and P.Sri Krishna Priya. The death of P.Jayaraman was not intimated to
the petitioner Board. A reminder, followed by a show cause notice, was
issued to the respondent firm. Thereafter, a fresh deed of Partnership
was executed.
3. It is the claim of the appellants that it is very difficult to
create or enter into a Deed of Retirement cum Admission of Partners
on 29.08.2021 just three days before the demise of Jayaraman and
that the partnership firm has been dissolved on the death of
P.Jayaraman.
4. Heard the submissions of learned counsel for the appellants.
We are unable to find any justification in his contentions. In our
considered opinion, there is no dispute among the partners of the firm.
Further, P.Jayaraman and P.Sri Krishna Priya were running the affairs of
the partnership firm till the date of death of Jayaraman on 03.09.2021.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMP No.21143 of 2022 &
W.A.No.SR 109874 of 2022
When there is no dispute between the partners, we are unable to find
any reason to doubt the execution of the Deed of Retirement three
days before the death, namely 29.08.2021.
5. In view of the above, we do not find any reason to condone
the delay of 53 days in filing the appeal against the order of the
learned Single Judge allowing the respondent firm to continue as a
party with the petitioner Board. Consequently, the writ appeal is
rejected at SR stage.
(T.R., ACJ.) (D.B.C., J.)
06.01.2023
Index : Yes/No
Neutral Citation : Yes/No
kpl
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMP No.21143 of 2022 &
W.A.No.SR 109874 of 2022
T.RAJA, ACJ,
and
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY,J
(kpl)
CMP No.21143 of 2022 &
Writ Appeal No.SR 109874 of 2022
06.01.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
