Raman Kapoor vs Government of NCT Delhi And Anr. on 22 April, 2002

   Raman Kapoor is a partner in the partnership firm in the name of M/s. Kapoor Sons and Co., along with Mr. O.P. Kapoor and other partners. The writ petition has its origin and genesis in family acrimony. Raman Kapoor is the son of Mr. O.P. Kapoor and other partners are his brother. Petitioner claims that he is also a partner in other family concerns and firms, such as Continental Films and M/s. Rupas International, which own various other assets. Raman Kapoor claims to have been looking after the business of partnership firm in Columbia. Writ petition has several averments with regard to the petitioner looking after the family business and interest in Columbia.

 The writ petition is that Mr. O.P. Kapoor in collusion with other partners, forged a notice of change in constitution of the registered firm by filing form V, appearing at page 21 of the paper book. Under Section 63(1) of the Act is to the effect that the petitioner has retired from the partnership. Raman Kapoor denies his signature as also the execution of the dissolution deed, which is stated to have been filed with the Registrar of Firms. The petitioner's claim is that the Registrar of Firms has acted on this forged document and has recorded the changes under Section 63 of the Indian Partnership Act. He submits that there is a CFSL report to the effect that the signatures of the petitioner have been forged.

  Respondents have filed the counter affidavit. It has been brought out in the counter affidavit that there are number of civil and criminal proceedings, which have been initiated by the Raman Kapoor against Mr. O.P. Kapoor and other family members. Mr. O.P. Kapoor had even filed a civil suit, wherein he had sought a declaration that the petitioner had not retired and continued to be a partner of the firm in question.

 The petitioner has filed the present writ petition seeking quashing of the order  recording the retirement of the petitioner  or otherwise direct the Registrar of firms of respondent to rectify Under Section 64 of the Indian Partnership Act

   Court held that the issue of petitioner's retirement from the said partnership is also pending. In these circumstances, the petition raised highly disputed questions of fact, which are under adjudication and the petitioner is not entitled to the issuance of a writ. The writ petition is dismissed.