JUDGMENT :

A piquant situation arises in the instant appeal when the Court within the meaning of the “court” assigned under Section 2(1)(e) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 quashed and set aside the arbitral award made and published by the statutory Arbitral Tribunal constituted under the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 on the ground of non-joinder of necessary party.

2. Before we venture to decide the points emanate from the impugned order and heavily supported by the learned Advocate for the respondent, the undisputed facts are required to be adumbrated in order to have the clarity and understanding of the genesis of the disputes involved in the instant case.

3. Indubitably, the lease and service agreement was executed between the parties to the proceeding, i.e. M/s. MSV Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. and the West Bengal Essential Commodities Supply Corporation Ltd. in respect of the demised premises owned and controlled by the appellant herein. The essential feature of the said agreement can be manifestly seen from different clauses incorporated therein that the demised premises was leased out to the respondent herein for a period of nine years three months and sixteen days at a lease rent to be calculated at rupee 8.88 per quintal per month totaling the amount of Rs. 17 lakhs 76 thousand with an annual increase in rent at the rate of 33% of the percentage increased in the wholesale price index.

4. Clause 7 whereof further stipulates that the lessee, respondent herein, agrees to make payment of rent to the appellant through authorized bank of the lessee as per the request of the lessor till the contract remains in operation from the date of the actual possession. The other essential terms of the said agreement are more or less uniform as used to be found in a lease agreement and the respondent herein was given liberty to sublease whole or any portion of the said demised premises to any party for such period as may deem fit but not exceeding the duration of the said lease. Since it was a composite agreement involving services to be rendered by the appellant, the service charges was also agreed to be paid by the lessee at such rate as may be settled by mutual negotiation.

5. Clause 40 of the said agreement postulates that the said demised premises shall be used for stocking of the food-grains and it was further indicated that since it is mandatory at the behest of the Food Corporation of India to maintain daily stock account by feeding data in the IISM software and transmit the same to the Central Server situated at New Delhi, it is obligatory on the part of the appellant to feed such data on daily basis. Apart from the same there is no reference in the said agreement pertaining to the Food Corporation of India though one can reasonably infer or logically deduce therefrom that such demised premises was used for keeping the food-grains belonging to the Food Corporation of India.

6. Admittedly the Food Corporation of India is not a party to the said agreement. Our attention is drawn to the fact that another agreement was entered into on the same day by and between the respondent and the Food Corporation of India reserving the same duration as provided in the agreement being the subject matter of disputes in the instant appeal and the corresponding obligations and liabilities in relation to the food-grains to be stored at the place provided by the respondent. In order to have the clarity and to avoid any ambiguity the appellant is not a party to the said agreement.

7. The dispute arises when the respondent failed and neglected to pay the lease rent and service charges in terms of the said agreement dated 27th November, 2014 and since the respondent is micro, small and medium enterprises, the dispute was referred to the West Bengal State Micro Small Enterprises Facilitation Council, who has been entrusted to conduct the arbitration under Section 18 of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act