Writ of prohibition cannot be used for partnership disputes where other remedies are available; petition dismissed.

A writ of prohibition is confined to restraining an inferior court or tribunal from acting beyond jurisdiction or in breach of natural justice, and it is not the proper remedy for internal partnership disputes. Where the grievances concerned alleged misuse of funds, denial of access to the unit, and other firm-related disputes, the High Court held that appropriate alternative forums were available. The writ petition was therefore not maintainable for the reliefs sought and was dismissed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition seeking prohibition and related reliefs against alleged acts of partners in a firm was maintainable before the High Court.

Analysis: A writ of prohibition lies to restrain an inferior court or tribunal from acting in excess of jurisdiction or in violation of natural justice. The grievances raised concerned disputes within a partnership and alleged misuse of funds and denial of access to the unit, for which appropriate forums were available. The writ jurisdiction was held not to be the proper remedy for such matters.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not maintainable for the reliefs sought and was dismissed.

---