Unregistered partnership firm bar under Section 69 yields to dissolution-related claims for accounts and limited goodwill.

An unregistered partnership firm is barred from enforcing contractual rights, but Section 69(3) preserves proceedings for dissolution, accounts of a dissolved firm, and realization of its property. Because the partnership had already been dissolved by mutual consent, a reference under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 was maintainable only for claims falling within that exception. The claim for accounts of the dissolved firm was referable, and the claim to goodwill survived only up to the date of dissolution. Claims for delivery of a vehicle and for post-dissolution transactions were contractual claims outside the exception and remained barred.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether a reference under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 was maintainable where the partnership firm was unregistered under Section 69 of the Partnership Act, 1932, and (ii) which claims concerning a dissolved firm fell within the exception in Section 69(3) of the Partnership Act, 1932.

Issue (i): Whether a reference under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 was maintainable where the partnership firm was unregistered under Section 69 of the Partnership Act, 1932.

Analysis: Section 69(1) imposes a bar on enforcement of contractual rights by or on behalf of an unregistered firm, and Section 69(3) extends that bar to claims for set-off and other proceedings to enforce rights arising from contract. The exception in Section 69(3), however, preserves proceedings for dissolution of a firm, accounts of a dissolved firm, and realization of the property of a dissolved firm. Where the partnership had already stood dissolved by mutual consent, the dispute was not about enforcing the contract of partnership itself but about working out the consequences of dissolution.

Conclusion: A reference under Section 20 was maintainable to the extent the dispute concerned the exception under Section 69(3) and was not barred merely because the firm was unregistered.

Issue (ii): Which claims concerning a dissolved firm fell within the exception in Section 69(3) of the Partnership Act, 1932.

Analysis: A claim for taking accounts of the dissolved firm fell squarely within the statutory exception. A claim relating to goodwill could survive only up to the date of dissolution. Claims for delivery of a vehicle and for matters arising from post-dissolution transactions were not covered by the exception and remained within the contractual bar. The court therefore separated referable claims from non-referable claims on the basis of whether they were tied to dissolution and accounting or were independent contractual claims.

Conclusion: Only the claim for accounts and the limited claim to goodwill up to dissolution were referable to arbitration, while the remaining claims were not.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded in part by confining the arbitration reference to claims protected by the statutory exception for dissolved partnerships, and excluding claims barred as enforcement of contractual rights of an unregistered firm.

Ratio Decidendi: Section 69(3) of the Partnership Act, 1932 does not bar proceedings that seek dissolution-related reliefs such as accounts of a dissolved firm or realization of its property, even where the firm is unregistered, but it continues to bar enforcement of ordinary contractual rights outside that exception.

---