Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

3.1. When the original partnership deed was written on 19.03.1998, the revision petitioner and his father alone were the partners of the 1st plaintiff-M/S. Precision Engineering and in the said partnership deed, under Clause 17, it was agreed that all the disputes relating to partnership business or its dissolution arising out of the deed should be resolved by arbitration and the decision of the Arbitrator should be final and binding on all the partners of the firm. Later, when the 3rd plaintiff-Mr.A.Murugan was inducted into the partnership firm and when the reconstituted deed was written, the earlier Clause about arbitration was not included. When the petitioner/ 2nd defendant filed the said application under Section 8 of the Act to refer the said suit for arbitration by invoking Clause 17 of the partnership deed dated 19.03.1998, respondents 1 to 3 herein namely the plaintiffs contested that the reconstituted deed does not contain any Clause as to arbitration and hence, such an order cannot be https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis passed.