Kambli 1 wp2052.95 IN THE HIGH COURT JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2052 OF 1995 ... 1. M/s.Hasmukh & Co. 2. Mr.Maheshchandra Narmada Shankar Pandya ...Petitioner v/s. 1. The Registrar of Firms 2. The State of Maharashtra ...Respondents ... Mr.Pravin Diwan i/b Shah & Sanghvi for the Petitioner. Mr.K.R.Belosay, AGP for State. ... CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH & N.D.DESHPANDE,JJ. Dated: 13th October, 2010 P.C.: 1. By this petition the Petitioner challenges the communication dated 9th March, 1995 from the Registrar of Firms declining to register the change in the duration of the partnership firm. 2. The relevant facts are, that the Kambli 2 wp2052.95 Petitioner No.1 is a registered partnership firm. At the time of registration, the duration of the firm was 10 years. Thereafter, by an agreement of partners it was decided to make a partnership at will. Thereafter, an application was made along with a copy of partnership deed for registration of that change with the Registrar of Firms. That application is dated 29th October, 1994. The Registrar of Firms, however, declined to register that amendment by communication dated 9th March, 1995 claiming that there is no provision in the Partnership Act for recording such change. The Petitioner again addressed a communication dated 18th April, 1995 repeating the same request. It was again rejected by communication dated 10th May, 1995 for the same reason. Kambli 3 wp2052.95 3. The Respondents are served. There is no affidavit filed by the Respondents. We have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner. It is section 58 of the Partnership Act which is relevant. Sub- sections 1 & 2 of Section 58 which are relevant for our purpose read as under:- 58(1) The registration of a firm may be effected at any time by sending by post or delivering to the Registrar of the area in which any place of business of the firm is situated or proposed to be situated, a statement in the prescribed form and accompanied by the prescribed fee, stating- (a) the firm name, (b) the place or principal place of business of the firm. (c) the names of any other places where the firm carries on business, (d) the date when each partner joined the firm. (e) the names in full and permanent addresses of the partners, and (f) the duration of the firm. The statement shall be signed by all the partners, or by their agents specially authorised in this behalf. Kambli 4 wp2052.95 (2) Each person signing the statement shall also verify it in the manner prescribed. It is clear from the above provisions that when an application is made for registration of a Firm, a statement is to be filed disclosing the name of the firm, the principal place of business of the firm, the names of any other places where the firm carries on business, the date on which each partners joined the firm, full names and addresses of the partners, and duration of the firm and each partners has to verify the statement to be true to his own knowledge. Section 60 of the Partnership Act provides that if there is any change in the name of the firm or its principal place of business, then a notice of that change has to be given to the Registrar of Firms, and then the Registrar has to record that change. Similar Kambli 5 wp2052.95 provision is made about closing and opening of branches as per the provisions of Sections 61 & Section 62 provides for recording of changes in name and addresses of partners and Section 63 provides for recording of changes in the Constitution of the Partnership Firm of its dissolution. Perusal of the provisions of Section 69 shows that if there is contravention of Sections 60, 61, 62 or 63, penalty can be imposed. Thus, there is no direct obligation cast by Sections 60 to 63 for intimating change in duration of the firm. Therefore, reading of Sections 60 to 63 with Section 69(a) shows that there is a statutory obligation cast on reporting of changes and if there is failure to perform that statutory obligation, a penalty can be imposed. It cannot be said that a change occurring in the duration of the firm is not necessary to be reported and incapable of Kambli 6 wp2052.95 being recorded by the Registrar. All that can be said is that failure to intimate that change will not result in any criminal action. We find from the provisions of section 58 that one of the statement that is to be made while seeking registration of the firm is the duration of the firm, and then, a statement has to be made while verifying that statement that it is correct and true statement. If there is actual change in the duration of the firm by an agreement of parties, the verification statement contained in the form submitted under Section 58 will no longer continue to be true and correct, therefore of necessity if there is a change in the duration of the firm that change will have to be reported and verification statement will have to be corrected accordingly. In other words, it can be said that Section 58 requires change in duration Kambli 7 wp2052.95 also to be intimated and if it is to be intimated, then impliedly an obligation is also cast on the Registrar to register the change. In other words, there is no prohibition contained on reporting and recording of such change. In our opinion, therefore, the Registrar was not justified in refusing to register the change for the reasons that there is no provision. In our opinion, reporting the change in duration and recording of such change is necessary in implementing the scheme of Section 58 itself. 4. In the result, therefore, petition succeeds and is allowed. Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clauses (a) & (b). No order as to costs. (D.K.DESHMUKH,J.) (N.D.DESHPANDE,J.)