Back
MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA
Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited, Electronics Division – Appellant
Versus
Optimal Power Synergy India Private Limited – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Moushumi Bhattacharya, J.
1. The petitioner has made an application under section 34 of The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for setting aside of an Arbitral Award dated 24.9.2019 which was communicated to the petitioner under cover of a letter dated 7.11.2019. The impugned Award was passed by the West Bengal State Micro Small Enterprises Facilitation Council before which the petitioner was the respondent/buyer. The impugned Award was passed on an application made by the supplier unit which is the respondent before this Court.
2. By the impugned Award, the respondent’s claim of supply of materials to the petitioner (buyer) and performing the work as per the order of the petitioner was established. The petitioner was accordingly held liable to pay the total outstanding principal amount of Rs. 61,08,654/-together with the interest on the said amount at 3 times of the Bank rate of the RBI compounded with monthly rests to the respondent under section 16 of The Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006. The respondent was directed to submit its claim of interest on the principal amount to the petitioner duly certified by a Chartered Accountant along with th
The mandatory pre-deposit requirement under Section 19 of the MSMED Act, 2006 for challenging an award and the overriding effect of the MSMED Act, 2006 over the Arbitration Act, 1996 in specific disp....
The entitlement of the award holder to MSME status, the quantification of interest claimed, and the reasoning behind the arbitral award were central legal points established in the judgment.
The court reiterated that challenges to awards under the MSMED Act must follow prescribed statutory remedies, including mandatory pre-deposit as per Section 19, rendering writ petitions inadmissible.
The court upheld the Arbitral Award, affirming that timelines and knowledge of the transaction were not claimed by the petitioner regarding delayed delivery impact.
The lack of conciliation does not undermine the statutory obligation to make payment under the MSMED Act, emphasizing the importance of adherence to payment timelines by the buyer.
EM-II filing discretionary for micro/small enterprises beyond 180 days; MSMED reference limitation starts from buyer's post-investigation denial, not supply date; narrow Section 34 scope upholds awar....
Important Point : The court established that statutory remedies must be exhausted before invoking writ jurisdiction against awards under the MSMED Act.
The High Court cannot exercise its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 or 227 of the Constitution against the awards or orders passed by the Arbitral Tribunals as it would defeat the object of minimi....
Jurisdictional challenges to arbitration awards must be raised under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, and the pre-deposit requirement under Section 19 of the MSME Act is mandatory.
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
