Back
PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, JOYMALYA BAGCHI
Sonali Power Equipments Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Chairman, Maharashtra State Electricity Board, Mumbai – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. applicability of limitation act to conciliation and arbitration. (Para 1) |
| 2. factual background of the case and parties involved (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. high court's interpretation and relevant orders (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. arguments from appellants and respondents regarding limitation laws (Para 6 , 7) |
| 5. judicial interpretation of recovery rights under the msmed act. (Para 8) |
| 6. court's analysis of conciliation and its relation to limitation (Para 24 , 32) |
| 7. court's ruling on arbitration claims and its implications (Para 34 , 35 , 50) |
| 8. final ruling on limitations and recovery mechanisms. (Para 51) |
| 9. final conclusions and orders by the court (Para 52 , 53 , 54) |
JUDGMENT :
PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, J.
| Table of Contents | |
| (I) | Introduction |
| (II) | Brief Facts |
| (III) | High Court order dated 24.08.2018 |
| (IV) | Impugned order |
| (V) | Submissions |
| (VI) | Issues |
| (VII) | Relevant statutory provisions |
| (VIII) | Whether time-barred claims can be referred to conciliation under Section 18(2) of the MSMED Act |
| (IX) | Whether time-barred claims can be referred to arbitration under Section 18(3) of the MSMED Act |
|
| |
The Limitation Act, 1963 is not applicable to conciliation proceedings under the MSMED Act but applies to arbitration under its provisions; time-barred claims can be settled through conciliation.
The Limitation Act, 1963 is not applicable to conciliation proceedings under the MSMED Act; however, it applies to arbitration proceedings, preventing stale claims from being raised under the Act.
The conciliation proceedings contemplated under Section 18(2) of MSMED Act is mandatory in nature, and failure to comply with the mandatory procedure vitiates the impugned order.
Writ petition not maintainable against MSMED Council orders; must challenge via Section 34 A&C Act with 75% pre-deposit.
The main legal point established is that arbitration proceedings under the MSMED Act must adhere to the procedural requirements of the Act and the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
The MSMED Act prevails over A&C Act provisions regarding interest, granting small enterprises specific rights on delayed payments independent of dispute resolution processes.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Facilitation Council has the jurisdiction to act as an Arbitrator after the failure of conciliation proceedings under the MSME Act. The ri....
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
