G.S.KULKARNI
Porwal Sales – Appellant
Versus
Flame Control Industries – Respondent
JUDGMENT
This is a arbitration petition filed under section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter for short “the said Act”), whereby the petitioner is before the Court praying that an arbitral tribunal be appointed to adjudicate the disputes between the parties under an agreement entered between the petitioner and the respondent, whereby the petitioner was appointed by the respondent as an exclusive stockists of the respondent’s products.
2. The question which arises for consideration in this Petition is as to whether the jurisdiction of this Court under section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is taken away merely because the respondent is a small scale enterprise falling under the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (for short “MSMED” Act), and when no application/reference has been made by the respondent invoking the provisions of Section 18(1) of the MSMED Act.
3. The petitioner is a proprietary concern of Mr. Vijay Porwal, and is engaged in selling and marketing all kinds of kitchen appliances/products, at Pune in Maharashtra at the address shown in the cause title. The respondent is stated to be engaged in the bus
Duro Felguera S.A. Vs. Gangavaram Port Ltd.
Velugunbanti Hari Babu Vs. Parvathini Narasimha Rao and Anr.
Gujarat State Petronet Ltd. vs. Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council & Ors.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
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.