https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165281 An application under Section 8(2) of the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940 to appoint an arbitrator was treated as a proceeding to enforce a contractual right arising from an arbitration clause, and was therefore hit by Section 69(3) of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932 where the partnership was unregistered. The expression "other proceeding" in Section 69(3) was construed broadly and was not confined by ejusdem generis to matters similar to a claim of set-off, because "claim of set-off" did not create a limiting genus. The bar under Section 69(3) thus extends to proceedings of any kind enforcing contractual rights, subject only to the section's express exceptions. en-us Wed, 29 Apr 1964 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 23 Aug 2014 11:04:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165281 An application under Section 8(2) of the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940 to appoint an arbitrator was treated as a proceeding to enforce a contractual right arising from an arbitration clause, and was therefore hit by Section 69(3) of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932 where the partnership was unregistered. The expression "other proceeding" in Section 69(3) was construed broadly and was not confined by ejusdem generis to matters similar to a claim of set-off, because "claim of set-off" did not create a limiting genus. The bar under Section 69(3) thus extends to proceedings of any kind enforcing contractual rights, subject only to the section's express exceptions. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 29 Apr 1964 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165281