DANYAL ENTERPRISES versus A.G.E. AND SONS (PVT.) LTD.
Sections 12, 42 and 54 of the Partnership Act (IX of 1932), Section 69 Civil Procedure Code (VV 1908), O VII, R 11 Release of specific contract, declaration and decree of the suit agreement are registered by the registered partnership firm An unregistered partnership firm was seeking action to seek jurisdiction, and the defendants claimed that the jurisdiction of the civil court was banned. Registration of the firm was neither mandatory nor could any penalty be imposed but there was a case to be taken in relation to the partnership which was not listed under the Partnership Act 1932. The Partnership Act, 1932, stated that the civil court had no discretion and rules; it was necessary to prevent a court from entertaining a court without compliance with this section, as the Partnership Act 1932 Is listed under Section 69. Disability of the unregistered firm through Section 69 of Partnership A was the nature and nature of the disability. The CT, 1932, was so compelling and comprehensive that there was no escaping of it and acting as an indirect compulsion to register, because the plaint was rejected under OVII, R 11, CPC. The case was stopped under Section 69 of the Contribution Act, 1932. In the circumstances it was allowed
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2015
