Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

15. Mr. Kakodkar indeed urged that the Corporation has been styled to be a "State" within the meaning of article 12 of the Constitution of India. He seriously disputes this position and contended that the Corporation is a company incorporated under the Companies Act and its shareholders are four States, namely, State of Maharashtra, State of Goa, State of Karnataka and State of Kerala. I need not go into this question as finally this issue is not necessary for deciding the present appeal.

16. It was next urged by Mr. Kakodkar that the suit is not maintainable because, according to him, though in the cause title the appellants have styled themselves to be partners under the Partnership Act, there is not even an averment in the body of the plaint that Parwani Builders are a registered partnership firm. He further points out that lack of averment is one thing, there is nothing produced on record by way of documentary evidence that the partnership is registered. Addressing himself to a certificate placed on record by the appellants he says that at some stage a partnership firm by same name had been registered earlier. According to him what was required to be produced was a certificate as to who are the part partners as on the date of the suit. He now says that it is not even possible for the appellants now to amend the suit and he relies on the authority of Shreeram Finance Corporation v. Yasin Khan to contend that the suit is incompetent. I am afraid that I cannot go into this question at this stage and at any rate I refuse to go into this question even for prima facie consideration. I think I better leave the issue for the trial court, if properly raised by the Corporation. Therefore, applying the test laid down by decided cases it is impossible to accept, on the facts and circumstances of this case, that the Corporation is liable to be restrained from encashing the bank guarantees and now from encashing the demand draft made in favour of the Corporation by respondent No. 3 in satisfaction of the demand contained by the Corporation's letter dated October 5, 1992. There can be no restraint whatsoever in so far as the Corporation is concerned.