ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE
Kendriya Bhandar, Central Government Employees Consumer Cooperative Society Limited – Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. The present Special Civil Application is filed praying for the following reliefs:-
(B) Pending the hearing and until the disposal of this petition, this Hon’ble Court may stay the operation, implementation and execution of the Arbitral Award No.17 of 2024 dated 10.06.2024 passed by Respondent No.2, bearing No.MSME-D/MSEFC/DP-4671/822/2 accepting Respondent No.3’s claim against the Petitioner (Annexure A).
(C) For ad interim ex parte relief in terms of Paragraph (B) above.”
2. The brief facts in the present case are that by G.O.RT. No.837 dated 24.12.2018, the Government of Telengana (Agriculture & Cooperation Department) nominated the petitioner Society as a nodal agency for supply of various items to government institutions in the State of Telengana. That the primary object of the petitioner was to supply the requisite edible/no
Jharkhand Urja Vikas Nigam Limited v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. - (2021) 19 SCC 206
Nivedita Sharma v. Cellular Operators Association of India & Ors. - (2011) 14 SCC 337
Nivedita Sharma v. Cellular Operators Association of India & Ors. - (2011) 14 SCC 337
L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India (1997) 3 SCC 261
Thansingh Nathmal v. Superintendent of Taxes AIR 1964 SC 1419
Titaghur Paper Mills Co. Ltd. v. State of Orissa (1983) 2 SCC 433
Secy. of State v. Mask and Co. (1939-40) 67 IA 222 : AIR 1940 PC 105
Mafatlal Industries Ltd. v. Union of India (1997) 5 SCC 536
PHR Invent Educational Society v. UCO Bank & Ors. - (2024) 6 SCC 579
The High Court will not entertain a writ petition if an effective alternative remedy is available under the MSMED Act, emphasizing adherence to statutory procedures for grievance redressal.
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....
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 Facilitation Council's failure to adhere to prescribed procedures in the MSMED Act renders its award a nullity, invalidating the requirement for challenge under the Arbitration Act.
The High Court cannot entertain writ petitions challenging awards of the Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council without the mandatory deposit of 75% of the awarded amount as per Section 19 ....
Orders by MSEFC failing to follow arbitration procedures under the MSMED Act are not valid awards, allowing for writ petitions under Article 226 due to natural justice violations.
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.
Writ Jurisdiction – Access to High Courts by way of writ petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India, is not just a constitutional right but also a part of basic structure – It is available t....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.