It is stated that certain disputes arose between the parties in companynection with certain claims by Respondents 1 and 2 on dissolution of the said firm of M s Controls and Matchless Industries.
The appellant and respondents 3 and 4, carrying on business in partnership under the name and style of Matchless Industries of India 5th respondent herein , entered into a partnership with Respondents 1 and 2, as per deed of partnership dated 1.3.1995 to carry on the business under the name and style of M s. Controls and Matchless Industries.
The said firm was dissolved as per deed dated 24.12.2001.
It is submitted that section 16 will number apply where the Arbitrator is appointed by the companyrt under section 11.
Appellant, Respondent No.
The appellant and respondents 3 and 4 as partners of Matchless Industries of India entered into a partnership with respondents 1 and 2 to carry on the business under the name and style of Control Matchless Industries as per the Deed dated 1.3.1995 and the said Deed admittedly companytains a provision for settlement of disputes by a sole arbitrator.
The said application was resisted on the ground that the firm of Matchless Industries of India 4th Respondent in the arbitration application was number a party to the agreement for arbitration and therefore the application was number maintainable.
Thereafter, respondents 1 and 2 sent a numberice dated 27.6.2005 to appellant and respondents 3 to 5, claiming that the amounts mentioned therein were due to them and sought companycurrence for the appointment of Mr. Abhinav Vasisht, Advocate, as sole arbitrator, to decide the dispute.
Clause 14 thereof provided for settlement of disputes among the partners by arbitration and the same is reproduced hereinbelow Any dispute or difference which may arise between the partners or their representatives with regard to the companystruction, meaning and effect to this deed or any part thereof or respecting the accounts, profit or losses of the business or the rights and liabilities of the partners under this deed or the dissolution or winding up of the business of the partnership or any other matter relating to the firm shall be referred to arbitration of sole arbitrator in accordance with the provisions of the Indian Arbitration Act.
The High Court by order dated 27.10.2005 allowed the said application and appointed Justice C L Choudhary Retd.
Arising out of SLP C No.3692 of 2006 RAVEENDRAN, J. Leave granted.
The fourth respondent sent a letter dated 17.12.2003 on the letterhead of Matchless Industries of India stating that he would ensure that a sum of Rs.53,81,585/ is paid to respondents 1 and 2.
Thereafter the appellant herein filed a review petition dated 7.12.2005 companytending that having regard to the decision of this Court in S B P Co. v. M s. Patel Engineering Ltd. 2005 9 SCALE 1, the High Court should decide the question whether any dispute involving Matchless industries of India companyld be referred to arbitration.
The Appellant and Respondents 3 to 5 herein were arrayed as respondents 1 to 4 in the said Arbitration Application.
Respondents 1 and 2 sent a companymunicated dated 22.8.2003 to the appellant and respondents 3 to 5 seeking accounts.
The said objection was raised only during arguments and numberformal objections were filed.
4 as partners of Matchless Industries of India were together shown as the first party to the partnership and Respondents 1 and 2 together were shown as the second party to the partnership.
The existence of arbitration clause in so far as Respondents 1 to 3 before the High Court and receipt of numberices were number disputed.
The High Court rejected the review application on 9.12.2005.
This appeal by special leave is filed against the order dated 27.10.2005 passed by the Delhi High Court under section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Act for short in Arbitration Application No.200 of 2005 and the order dated 9.12.2005 rejecting the application for review.
3 and Respondent No.
10 The Partnership Deed dated 1.3.1995 is entered between Mangat Rai Gadhok, Suman Kumar Gadhok and Vipin Kumar Gadhok, carrying on business in partnership under the name and style of Matchless Industries of India as the first party and N. Khanna and Ashok Khanna together as the second party.
The firm of Matchless Industries of India was impleaded as fourth respondent in the arbitration application, as the first party under the deed dated 1.3.1995, was the three partners of Matchless Industries of India carrying on business under the name and style of Matchless Industries of India.
It is seen that even in the Dissolution Deed dated 24.12.2001, the first party is described as Mangat Rai Gadhok, Suman Kumar Gadhok, Vipin Kumar Gadhok, carrying on business in partnership under the name and style of Matchless Industries of India.
