SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2012 Supreme(Mad) 4654

ELIPE DHARMA RAO, M.VENUGOPAL
Eden Exports Company Rep by its Partner – Appellant
Versus
Union of India, Rep by its Secretary, New Delhi – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Appearing Parties:Zaffarullah Khan, K.S.V. Prasad, Perumbalavil Radhakrishnan, Jayesh Dolia, M/s. Aiyar & Dolia, M. Raghunandham, M/s. T.S. Gopalan & Co. T. Saikrishnan, M/s. K.S. Natarajan, P.S. Raman, M/s. Puspha Menon, Muthukumarasamy, Senior Counsel for M/s. A. Jenasenan, T. Mohan, S. Viswanathan, A. Narayanan, G. Vasudevan, J. Sivanandaraaj, Union of India, M. Ravindran, Addl Solicitor General of India, K. Mohanamurali, A. Navaneethakrishnan, Advocate General Assisted by S.T.S. Moorthy, Mrs. M.E. Raniselvam, R. Bala Ramesh, R2, A.S. Rajkumar Vadivel, R2, D. Krishnakumar, N. Viswanathan, G. Rajasekaran, Party in Person, Venkatachalapathy, Senior Counsel for M. Sriram, C. Saravanan, N. Ramakrishnan, M/s. Waraon & Sairams, G.S. Rajasekaran, Party-in-Person, Advocates.

JUDGMENT

ELIPE DHARMA RAO, J.

1. All the writ appeals arise out of the common order passed by the learned single Judge in WP.No.16908 of 2009 & etc. batch, dated 20.08.2010. Most of the writ petitions were filed challenging various provisions of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (Central Act 27 of 2006) as unconstitutional. Some writ petitions were filed challenging the orders passed by the Facilitation Council and the notices issued by the said Council. Since the issues involved in all these matters are intrinsically interconnected, they were heard together and disposed of by this common judgment.

2. In most of all these writ appeals and the writ petitions, some of the provisions of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (Central Act 27 of 2006) (in short "MSMED Act") are challenged as unconstitutional and ultra vires of the Constitution of India. The learned single Judge under the impugned order dated 20.08.2010, held that the provisions under challenge cannot be said to be unconstitutional and ultra vires and dismissed the writ petitions, giving rise to the present writ appeals.

3. We have heard the learned counsel appearing fo































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top