Back
M. R. SHAH, B. V. NAGARATHNA
Vaishno Enterprises – Appellant
Versus
Hamilton Medical AG – Respondent
JUDGMENT
M.R. Shah, J.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad in Writ Appeal No. 201 of 2021 by which the High Court has dismissed the said appeal and has confirmed the order passed by the learned Single Judge quashing the Intimation-cum-Notice dated 22.10.2020 and Notices dated 04.11.2020 and 12.11.2020 issued by Micro and Small Medium Enterprises Facilitation Council(hereinafter referred to as 'the Council'), the original applicant has preferred the present appeal.
2. That the appellant is a registered partnership consultant which provides consultancy services to foreign medical equipment companies in the form of liaisoning services with hospitals and government departments and entities for procurement of medical equipment like ventilators. That Respondent No. 1 herein is a company registered under the laws of Switzerland, having its office at Bonaduz, Switzerland and is a manufacturer and supplier of critical care ventilation solutions for a variety of patient segments, applications and environments across the world. According to the respondent, it has its own consultants, engaged in I
None of the cases listed explicitly indicate that they have been overruled, reversed, or otherwise treated as bad law. There are no keywords such as "overruled," "reversed," "disapproved," or "criticized" in the provided summaries that suggest a negative treatment or invalidation of these cases.
Followed/Consistently Cited:
These two entries appear to reference the same case, with the latter citing the former. The language "taking the view that for initiation of proceedings under the MSMED Act" suggests these cases have been cited as authoritative or are part of a consistent judicial view. There is no indication of negative treatment or overrule.
Uncertain or Ambiguous Treatment:
This case discusses the legal position regarding interest and the applicability of the Act, the Limitation Act, and the jurisdiction of the High Court. The language does not indicate whether this case has been overruled or criticized; it merely states the legal position. Without explicit references to subsequent treatment, its judicial standing remains uncertain.
Summary:
The cases involving Hamilton Medical AG appear to be consistent and authoritative, with no evidence of being overruled or criticized.
The case regarding interest payments is presented as a statement of legal principles without indication of negative treatment or invalidation.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
