Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 13368 Mad
Judgement Date : 29 September, 2023
Appeal (CAD) No.16 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 29.09.2023
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR.SANJAY V.GANGAPURWALA, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.D.AUDIKESAVALU
Appeal (CAD) No.16 of 2023
M/s.Jayam Enterprises,
rep. by its one of the Proprietors Rajeswari Jayakar,
21/8, Dr.Radhakrishnan Nagar,
Old Washermenpet,
Chennai-600 021. .. Appellant
Vs
M/s. PA Sea Impex,
rep. by its Proprietor Parthiban,
No.232 (Old No.205) 3rd Floor,
Lingi Chetty Street, Parrys,
Chennai-600 001. .. Respondent
Prayer: Appeal under Section 13 of the Commercial Courts Act read
with Section 96 of the Civil Procedure Core, 1908 against the order
dated 26.9.2022 made in I.A.No.1 of 2022 in C.O.S.No.576 of 2022 in
O.S.No.7152 of 2021 on the file of the Commercial Court, Chennai.
For the Appellant : Mr.G.Shiji Mathew
For the Respondent : Mr.P.V.Sanjeev
__________
Page 1 of 4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Appeal (CAD) No.16 of 2023
JUDGMENT
(Delivered by the Hon'ble Chief Justice)
We have heard Mr.G.Shiji Mathew, learned counsel for the
appellant and Mr.P.V.Sanjeev, learned counsel for the respondent.
2. The present appellant is the original plaintiff. The appellant
had filed the suit for recovery of the amount against the
respondent/defendant. The plaint is rejected, as it is barred by
Section 69(2) of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
defendant accepted that there is no privity of contract. This aspect
ought to have been considered by the Court.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant does not dispute that the
plaintiff is a partnership firm. The said partnership firm is
unregistered. The plaint is filed for recovery of the amount on
account of the goods supplied.
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Appeal (CAD) No.16 of 2023
5. The bar of Section 69(2) of the Indian Partnership Act,
1932, as such, is attracted. The trial court while dismissing the suit
has properly considered the said aspect as the suit is barred by
Section 69(2) of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932.
6. In the light of the above, the appeal is dismissed. The
rejection of plaint would not come in the way of the appellant to
avail the remedy as may be permissible under law. There will be no
order as to costs.
(S.V.G., CJ.) (P.D.A., J.)
29.09.2023
Index : Yes/No
Neutral Citation : Yes/No
bbr
To:
The Sub Assistant Registrar
Commercial Cases
High Court, Madras.
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Appeal (CAD) No.16 of 2023
THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND P.D.AUDIKESAVALU,J.
bbr
Appeal (CAD) No.16 of 2023
29.09.2023
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!