Anil Tarare & Anr. vs. 3 Aaa Hospitality & Ors.

Facts

This Regular First Appeal (RFA 988/2026) was filed by Mr. Anil Tarare and Mr. Ashok Kabra (Appellants) against the Judgment and Decree dated 16.03.2026, passed by the Trial Court. The Trial Court had partly decreed the suit filed by the Plaintiff/Respondent No. 3, Sh. Ashutosh Gangwar, for arrears of rent, service tax/GST, electricity charges, and Mesne Profits. The Plaintiff, owner of the suit property in Dwarka, New Delhi, had leased it to Defendant No. 1, M/s 3AAA Hospitality, a partnership firm. The Appellants, partners in the firm, disputed their liability, claiming they had exited the partnership. The suit was filed for possession, arrears of rent, and Mesne Profits.

Held

The Court held that the Appellants, Mr. Anil Tarare and Mr. Ashok Kabra, remained partners of M/s 3AAA Hospitality and were jointly and severally liable for the dues to the Plaintiff, Sh. Ashutosh Gangwar. The Court found that the Appellants' conduct after March 9, 2017, including correspondence with the landlord and proposals for renovation, was inconsistent with their claimed exit from the partnership. Emails and letters from the Appellants, such as the one dated March 11, 2017, requesting the landlord to bear with the firm and seeking permission for renovation, and the email dated July 3, 2017, which was a proposal requiring landlord confirmation, were considered. The Court noted that the landlord had not confirmed this proposal and continued to issue legal notices to all defendants. The Court also held that the closure of the Appellants' right to lead evidence was justified. The Appellants were granted multiple opportunities over seven months to file their affidavits, which they failed to do. The delay in filing the recall application further supported the closure. The Court found no prejudice caused by the closure, as the key documents forming the basis of the Appellants' defense were already on record and had been considered. Therefore, the suit was not bad for non-joinder of Mr. Umesh Sharma, and the Appellants were liable for the dues.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Appellants, Mr. Anil Tarare and Mr. Ashok Kabra, continued to be partners of M/s 3AAA Hospitality and thus jointly and severally liable for the dues to the Plaintiff, Sh. Ashutosh Gangwar, despite their alleged resignation from the partnership? (Question of law and mixed fact and law, turning on partnership law and the terms of the partnership deed). 2. Whether the closure of the Appellants' right to lead evidence by the Trial Court was justified and caused prejudice to their defense? (Question of law and mixed fact and law, turning on procedural fairness and rules of evidence). Contentions of the Appellants: The Appellants argued that they had resigned from the partnership firm M/s 3AAA Hospitality on 30.04.2017, and thereafter, Defendant No. 4, Mrs. Deepa Kumar, was solely responsible for the firm's affairs and the suit property. They contended that the Trial Court's closure of their right to lead evidence was erroneous and prejudiced their defense, as crucial documentary evidence and oral testimony were not presented. They relied on their resignation letters and internal arrangements amongst partners. Contentions of the Revenue/State (Plaintiff): The Plaintiff argued that the Appellants continued to act as partners and corresponded with the landlord on behalf of the firm even after their alleged resignation. They pointed to emails and letters written by the Appellants after March 2017 as evidence of their continued involvement. The Plaintiff also argued that the closure of evidence was justified due to the Appellants' persistent failure to file affidavits and pay costs, and that no prejudice was caused as the relevant documents were already on record.