Thorat Wine Mart vs Surekha Ravindra Thorat on 1 April, 2026
In the case of Hasina
Mohamad Shafik Lalji and Ors. vs. Fatima Correa Nee Fatima Yakub
Ali (supra), an identical clause in the partnership deed came up for
consideration in the context of Section 34 of the Arbitration Act. In
that case, one of the partners had expired in the year 1982 and in the
year 2012, the arbitration clause was invoked claiming profits arising
sa_mandawgad 11 of 13
ARBP 522-25.doc
from the use of the deceased partner's share of the capital of the
firm. On aspect of limitation, the learned Single Judge considered the
provisions of Section 88, Illustration (f) and Section 95 of Trusts Act
dealing with the fiduciary obligation and Section 10 of Limitation Act
providing for suits against trustees and their representatives not
being barred by any length of time.