Vikram Nath JUDGMENT
Dinesh Maheshwari, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. This appeal, by the Plaintiff of a suit for declaration and injunction, is directed against the judgment and order dated 15.02.2018, as passed by the High Court of Gujarat1, in Civil Revision Application No. 241 of 2017, whereby the High Court has allowed the revision application filed by the contesting Defendants (Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 herein) and has reversed the order dated 07.04.2017, as passed by the Court of 9th Additional Senior Civil Judge, Vadodara2 in Special Civil Suit No. 333 of 2015.
2.1. By the said order dated 07.04.2017, the Trial Court had rejected the application moved by the contesting Defendants Under Order VII Rule 11(d), Order XXX Rules 1 and 2 and Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 19083 read with Section 69 of the Indian Partnership Act, 19324 for rejection of plaint on the ground that the suit filed by and on behalf of an unregistered partnership firm was barred by law. The Trial Court essentially held that, on its subject-matter relating to the validity of the sale deed in question, the bar of Section 69(2) was not operating against this suit. However, the High Court has taken a contrary view of the matter and has held that the Plaintiff, being an unregistered firm, would be barred to enforce a right arising out of the contract in terms of Section 69(2) of the Act of 1932.
3. We may take note of the factual matrix and the background aspects of the matter, so far relevant for the question calling for determination in this matter, i.e., as to whether the subject suit, filed by an unregistered partnership firm, is covered by the bar created by Section 69(2) of the Act of 1932?
The relevant factual matrix and background
4. For a proper comprehension of the subject-matter, worthwhile it would be to take note of the status of respective parties before dilating on the pleadings and submission........