Kerala High Court
Elizabeth Kurian vs Thomas Ignatious on 19 July, 1990
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALAAT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH
MONDAY,THE 17TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2014/28TH MAGHA, 1935
AR.No. 65 of 2013 ()
---------------------
PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONER:
------------------------------------------------
ELIZABETH KURIAN, W/O.P.C.KURIAN,
PARAMPIL HOUSE, VEROOR.P.O
NOW RESIDING AT PARAMPIL HOUSE
NEAR VIMALA PUBLIC SCHOOL, THODUPUZHA KARA
THODUPUZHA VILLAGE, THODUPUZHA TALUK.
BY ADV. SRI.ANIL D.KARTHA
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS:
----------------------------------------------------
1. THOMAS IGNATIOUS, S/O.P.I.IGNATIOUS,
KANIAMMOOZHIYIL HOUSE, THODUPUZHA
NOW AT REMYA PHARMACEUTICALS
THEKKEDATHU BUILDING
NEAR KSRTC BUS STAND,
THODUPUZHA-685585.
2. JOJO JOSEPH, S/O.V.U.JOSEPH,
VALIYAMATTAM HOUSE, NELLIMATTAM.P.O
NOW AT REMYA PHARMACEUTICALS,
THEKKEDATHU BUILDING
NEAR KSRTC BUS STAND,
THODUPUZHA-685585.
3. MARY KURIAKOSE, W/O.V.U.KURIAKOSE,
VALIYAMATTAM HOIUSE, EAST MARADY.P.O,
NOW AT REMYA PHARMACEUTICALS
THEKKEDATHU BUILDING,
NEAR KSRTC BUS STAND
THODUPUZHA-685 585.
R1,R2 & 3 BY ADV. SRI.BAIJU JOHN
R1,R2 & 3 BY ADV. SRI.JOHN VARGHESE(THOPPIL)
R1,R2 & 3 BY ADV. SRI.ELDHO K.MATHEW
THIS ARBITRATION REQUEST HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
17-02-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
AR NO. 65/2013
APPENDIX
ANNEXURE 1 : TRUE COPY OF THE PARTNERSHIP DEED DATED 19.07.1990
ANNEXURE 2 : TRUE COPY OF THE PARTNERSHIP DEED DATED 01.04.1994.
ANNEXURE 3 : TRUE COPY OF THE PARTNERSHIP DEED DATED 22.12.2001.
ANNEXURE 4 : TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 02.02.2013.
ANNEXURE 5 : TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 20.11.2013.
ANNEXURE 6 : TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 28.11.2013.
/TRUE COPY/
P.A. TO JUDGE.
V. CHITAMBARESH, J
--------------------------------
A.R. NO. 65 OF 2013
------------------------------------
Dated this the 17th day of February, 2014
ORDER
The petitioner as well as the respondents are partners of a firm - M/s. Remya Pharmaceuticals. A dispute exists between the partners as regards the share of profits. The property of the petitioner has also been offered as security for the loan availed by the firm from the bank.
2. Annexure A3 partnership deed executed after reconstitution inter alia reads as follows:
"21. Arbitration - That all disputes relating to the partnership business shall be decided by an arbitrator and his decision shall be final and binding."
The request of the petitioner for appointment of an arbitrator has not been favoured by the respondents. It is under these circumstances, as this Arbitration Request been filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.
3. The dispute inter se between the partners of the firm - M/s. Remya Pharmaceuticals has to be resolved. I therefore appoint Mr. P. Sankaranunni (District Judge, Retired) as the sole 2 A.R. No. 65/2013 arbitrator to resolve the dispute The arbitrator is at liberty to fix his fee and also the venue of hearing.
The Arbitration Request is allowed.
V. CHITAMBARESH JUDGE ncd