A. Navinchandra Steels Pvt. Ltd. vs Union of India

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(Bom) 32

B. P. COLABAWALLA, M. M. SATHAYE
A. Navinchandra Steels Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent

Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Mathews Nedumpara a/w Hemali Kurne, Maria Nedumpara, B. S. Mundey and Shameem i/b Nedumpara & Nedumpara Advocates
For the Respondent: Sanjiv Punalekar, Advait Sethna, a/w Ashutosh Mishra & Rangan Majundar, Madhur Rai, Sanjay Anabhawane, Girish T. i/b Meghnath Navlani, Harjot Singh Alang i/b Raval Shah & Co, Karl Tamboli a/w Mayank Samuel i/b Sirius Legal, Arkesh Ayyagari, Aayush Kothari i/b Sanjana Ghogare, Nimay Dave a/w Bharti Bhansali & Jyotika Raichandani, i/b FZB & Associates, Mr. Anant Bamne, M. S. Bharadwaj, Pavitra Manesh i/b Vaishali Bhilare, Vaibhav Charalwar a/w Kaustubh Gupte & Poonam Ashar, Jenish Jain, Tanya Srivastava i/b MLS Vani & Associates, Alok Mishra a/w Sejal Tambe, Girish T. i/b Meghnath Mavlani, Karl Tamboly i/b Mayank Samuel, O.A.Das a/w Pallavi Chori & Priya Nigwekar i/b O. A. Das, Uma Palsule-Desai, Abhay Patki, Addl. G. P., P. H. Kantharia, Himanshu Takke, Milind More, a/w Jyoti Chavan, Manish Upadhyay, AGP, Himanshu Takke, Kedar Dighe, Amit Shastri, L. T. Satelkar

JUDGMENT :

M.M. SATHAYE, J.

1. These group of Petitions raise a common issue involving a challenge to the action of Respondent Banks or Non-Banking Financial Companies, based on a Notification dated 29th May, 2015 issued under Section 9 of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (for short “MSMED Act”). This notification is hereinafter referred to as “the said Notification” for short.

2. It is specifically agreed between all the Petitioners and all the Respondent-Banks or Non-Banking Financial Companies (for short “NBFC”) appearing through their respective advocates including Mr. Nedumpara for all Petitioners, that presently, without going into facts and merits of individual cases, only the ground based on said Notification will be considered and depending on the outcome on the said issue, further directions would be passed. In that view of the matter, this common order is being passed.

3. By these petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioners, who are stated to be duly registered under the MSMED Act, and who are borrowers who have taken loans or other financial assistance from the Respondent Banks/NBFCs, have challenged the very

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2024 Supreme(Bom) 32

B. P. COLABAWALLA, M. M. SATHAYEA. Navinchandra Steels Pvt. Ltd. – AppellantVersusUnion of India – Respondent

Cases Referred (2)

B. P. COLABAWALLA, M. M. SATHAYE
A. Navinchandra Steels Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent