Registrar's power under Partnership law is limited to rectification; cancellation of firm registration certificate was invalid.

The Indian Partnership Act, 1932 confers only limited rectification powers on the Registrar: Section 64 allows correction of entries so the register matches filed documents, but it does not authorise cancellation of a firm's registration certificate or adjudication of disputed factual issues. The Delhi Partnership (Registration of Firms) Rules, 1972 permit protest, document examination and inquiry, yet do not create a de-registration power. A registration certificate is an acknowledgment of statutory particulars and cannot be rescinded under Section 21 of the General Clauses Act, 1897. The Delhi HC further noted that the cancellation was issued by an authority other than the Registrar contemplated by Section 57 and, on the facts, fraud was not shown in a manner justifying cancellation.

---

---

Issues: Whether the authority under the Indian Partnership Act, 1932 could cancel a firm's registration certificate by invoking Section 64 of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932 and Section 21 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, and whether the impugned cancellation orders were valid where fraud was alleged.

Analysis: The scheme of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932 distinguishes between registration, recording of alterations, and rectification of mistakes. Section 64 empowers only correction of entries so that the register conforms to the documents filed; it does not confer a power to adjudicate disputed questions of fact or to cancel a registration certificate. The Delhi Partnership (Registration of Firms) Rules, 1972 permit protest, examination of documents, and inquiries in aid of the Registrar's duties, but they do not create a power of de-registration. The registration certificate under the Act was treated as an acknowledgment of the statutory statement and not as an order capable of being rescinded under Section 21 of the General Clauses Act, 1897. The Court further held that the impugned cancellation was passed by an authority who was not the Registrar contemplated by Section 57 and that, in any event, the registration on the facts disclosed was not shown to have been obtained by fraud in a manner justifying cancellation.

Conclusion: The Registrar had no power to cancel the registration certificate under Section 64 of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932, with or without aid of Section 21 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, and the cancellation orders were invalid; the petition succeeded.

Ratio Decidendi: In the absence of an express statutory power, a Registrar under the Indian Partnership Act, 1932 may rectify entries to conform to filed documents, but cannot cancel a firm's registration certificate or decide disputed inter se factual issues by resorting to Section 21 of the General Clauses Act, 1897.

---