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

2013 Supreme(All) 2453

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Before : V.K. Shukla and Suneet Kumar, JJ.
M/s. Hameed Leather Finishers .....Petitioner
Versus
M/s. Associated Chemical Industries Kanpur Pvt. Ltd. and another ....Respondents
(Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 52747 of 2013, decided on 11th October, 2013)

Advocates:
Counsel :
Vivek Mishra, A.G. Karunakar and V.C. Mishra for the Petitioner; Nikhil Agrawal and Ram Krishna, C.S.C. for the Respondents.

Headnote:(A) Small Scale and Ancilliary Industrial Undertakings Act, 1993—Sections 7-A and 6—Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006—Sections 2(1), 8, 16, 18, 19, 20 and 32(2)—General Clauses Act, 1897—Sections 6 and 24—Establiment—Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Councils, notification dated 22.1.2006 in exercise of its powers under Section 7-A—This Facilitation Council would have jurisdiction and deal with complaints under Section 16 of 2006, in year 2008—By virtue of saving clause of Section 32 (2) and provisions of Sections 6 and 14 of Act, 1897, as Section 7-A of Act 1993 and 20 of Act, 2006, which deal with same matter—Are not inconsistent or conflicting—Consequently, fact that no fresh notification for establishment or continuation of Facilitation Council has been issued under Section 20 of Act 2006—Would not make any difference—As such, Facilitation Council established under Section 7-A of Act, 1993—Will continue to function and will not lack jurisdiction to entertain complaint under Section 16 of Act, 2006 inspite of fact that Act 1993 has been repealed—Details of legal factors—Projected. [Paras 14 and 16 to 19]

       (B) Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006—Sections 2(1), 8, 16, 18, 19, 20 and 32(2)—Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996—Section 34—Award—Defaulted in payment—Petitioner filed application under Section 19 for correction of award without depositing 75% of pre-deposit amount—It failed to deposit that amount inspite of time granted by District Judge—Therefore, its application was dismissed—In meanwhile Supplier, in whose favour award was filed, instituted execution proceedings—Petitioner filed objection under Section 34, which was rejected—Both orders, i.e., dismissal of application under Section 19 and dismissal of objection under Section 34—Allowed to became final by petitioner—As such, present writ petition challenging orders of authorities below—Cannot be entertained, as such, deserve dismissal, because no equities exist in favour of petitioner—Relevant legal aspects—Venticated. [Paras 22, 24 and 26 to 29]

JUDGMENT

By the Court.—M/s. Hameed Leather Finishers through its Proprietor/Partner Abdul Hameed has approached this Court for following relief:

(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to call for the record of the case and to quash the Injunction Proceeding No. 25/11 (M/s. Associated Chemical Industries Kanpur Pvt. Ltd. v. Hameed Leather Finishers) pending before the Learned District Judge Kanpur Nagar for Execution of the Award dated 8.11.2010 passed by the U.P. Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council U.P. Kanpur for execution of which, the Execution proceedings are pending.

(b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS commanding the respondent not to proceed with against the petitioner attaching the property of the petitioner, in lieu of the execution proceeding.

© Issue any other and further writ, order or direction which this Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case”

2. Brief background of the case is that M/s. Associated Chemical Industries Kanpur Private Limited Kanpur Nagar registered with Small Scale Industry came up with the case that it has supplied chemical to Abdul Hameed and Irshad Alam partner of M/s. Hameed Leather Finishers Gajju Purwa district Kanpur Nagar and the said buyer in question did not pay the outstanding amount to the tune of Rs. 1,44,28,932.00/-(One Crore Forty Four Lacs Twenty Eight Thousand Nine Hundred Thirty Two) only, as principal amount and interest amount to the tune of Rs. 31,19,735.75.00/-(Thirty one lacs Nineteen Thousand Seven Hundred Seventy Two and Seventy Five paisa) only. Notice has been sent to the incumbents representing the petitioners to ensure payment of aforesaid amount in lieu of supplies and receipt of chemical in question by them. The request of ensuring payment went unheeded and then the supplier. Respondent No. 1, invoked the forum as provided for under The Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006, Section 16 by moving complaint before U.P. Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council, Kanpur.

3. On the said complaint in question being moved before the U.P. Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council, U.P. at Kanpur, same was registered as Case No. IFC No. 01/2008 (M/s. Associated Chemical Industries (Kanpur) Pvt. Ltd. Kanpur v. M/s. Hameed Leather Finishers Kanpur). Council concerned took cognisance of the matter and notice has been issued to the defendant of the aforesaid proceeding in question i.e. the petitioner and the in the said proceeding in question two written submissions have been filed and the defence was sought to be taken that chemical supplied by the M/s. Associated Chemical Industries Kanpur were not up to the mark and was sub-standard quality and in effect contrarily they were liable to be compensated. Thereafter it is reflected that reply has been filed to the said written statement. U.P. Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council, U.P. at Kanpur on 8.11.2010 keeping in view the provisions as contained under Sections 15 and 16 of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 passed award in favour of M/s. Associated Chemical Industries Kanpur Private Limited Kanpur Nagar categorically recording finding that supplies have been made and the same has been duly received by the petitioners, and the amount in question had not been paid, even after receiving the supplies. The theory of sub-standard supply has also been considered and not accepted keeping in view the provisions of Section 2(b) of Act 2006.

4. Petitioner after the said award in question has been passed at the said point of time of proceeded to move application under Section 19 of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 numbered as Case No. 11/70 of 2011 and in the said proceeding in question at no point of time pre-requisite deposit of 75% has been made and Court of District Judge Kanpur accorded time for deposit of pre-requisite amount in ques















































































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 Back to top