https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282137 Registration of a partnership firm was treated as a mandatory condition precedent for instituting a suit of the relevant nature; where the firm was unregistered on the date of filing, the plaint was void and subsequent registration did not cure the defect. The bar under the Partnership Act was therefore substantive and went to maintainability, leaving the court without jurisdiction to proceed. On withdrawal, leave to sue afresh under Order XXIII Rule 1(3) CPC was unavailable because non-registration was not a formal defect but a root-level bar to the suit. The suit was dismissed and permission to file a fresh suit was refused. en-us Tue, 12 Mar 1991 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 23 Jul 2019 16:51:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282137 Registration of a partnership firm was treated as a mandatory condition precedent for instituting a suit of the relevant nature; where the firm was unregistered on the date of filing, the plaint was void and subsequent registration did not cure the defect. The bar under the Partnership Act was therefore substantive and went to maintainability, leaving the court without jurisdiction to proceed. On withdrawal, leave to sue afresh under Order XXIII Rule 1(3) CPC was unavailable because non-registration was not a formal defect but a root-level bar to the suit. The suit was dismissed and permission to file a fresh suit was refused. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 12 Mar 1991 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282137