Smt Sirajunnisa Alvi v. Mohd. Mustafa Ahmed Alvi & Ors.

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.5521 OF 2009 Between : Smt Sirajunnisa Alvi ... PETITIONER A N D Mohd. Mustafa Ahmed Alvi and others …RESPONDENTS THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 5521 OF 2009 ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is directed against the order, dated 18.09.2009, in I.A.No.153 of 2009 in O.S.No.328 of 1997 on the file of Additional Judge, City Small Causes Court-cum-VI Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, whereunder and whereby, the application filed by petitioner / Defendant No.5 under Order VII Rule 11 (d) read with Section 151 C.P.C. to reject the plaint filed in O.S.No.328 of 1997, was dismissed.

#2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that under Section 69 (2) of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932 ( for short “the Act”) suit by an unregistered firm is not maintainable and therefore, the plaint has to be rejected.

#3. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondents contended that under Section 69 (2) of the Act, no suit to enforce a right arising from a contract shall be instituted in any Court by or on behalf of a firm against any third party unless the firm is registered and the persons suing are or have been shown in the Register of Firms as partners in the firm. No doubt, the above provision makes it clear that unless a firm is registered and its partners are recorded in the register of firms, no suit shall lie by or against the firm or its partners. This aspect of the case can be raised at the time of argument in the suit in view of the fact that the case is at the fag end and it is ripe for disposal. Under Section 69 (3) (a) of the Act, the enforcement of any right to sue for the dissolution of a firm. Section 69 and sub sections (1) and (2) have no application because one of the prayers is dissolution of firm particularly it is falls under Section 69 (3) (a) of the Act. However, any objection is made in this Order, it is only for the purpose of disposal of this revision. Whether the unregistered firm can file a suit or to be sued is left open to be decided by the trial Court in accordance with law after adducing the evidence. Therefore, there are no grounds to interfere with the impugned order.

#4. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. NOVEMBER 11, 2010. YVL _______________ K.C.BHANU. J