Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
P. SAM KOSHY
K12 Techno Services Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Brahma Teja Paper Products – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. review of the msefc's order regarding limitation. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. petitioner's argument on applicability of limitation act. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 3. court's assessment of msefc's decision-making process. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 4. mandate to prioritize limitation issues. (Para 11) |
| 5. disposal of civil revision petitions with directive. (Para 12 , 13) |
ORDER :
P. SAM KOSHY, J.
Since the issue in the Revisions is one and the same, they are being disposed of by this Common Order.
2. Heard Mr.Vikram Pooserla, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. P. Gautham Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner.
3. The instant Civil Revision Petitions are filed by the petitioner under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the Common Order dated 15.06.2024 in Case No.Ref.No.235/MSEFC/2019 & Ref.No.237/MSEFC/2019 passed by the Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council (for short, ‘the MSEFC’) under Section 16 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, ‘the impugned order’).
4. For convenience, the facts in Civil Revision Petition No.3136 of 2024 are discussed hereunder.
5. The challenge in the instant Revision is primarily to the order that was passed on 1
Issues of maintainability, especially regarding limitation, must be resolved before proceeding to merits in arbitration processes.
Facilitation Council cannot reject reference under MSMED Act Section 18(1) on limitation; must attempt conciliation under 18(2) even for time-barred claims, as non-adjudicatory; limitation applies on....
The Limitation Act applies to claims under the Interest on Delayed Payments to Small Scale and Ancillary Industrial Undertakings Act, despite the latter lacking a specific limitation period.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of complying with the provisions of Section 19 for challenging an award under the Act of 1996 and the limitations on entertaining a....
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....
The benefits under the MSMED Act do not apply if the registration was obtained subsequently to the last invoice raised by the supplier.
Writ petition against arbitral award is maintainable; petitioner must follow remedies under Arbitration Act.
The limitation period for challenging an arbitral award under Section 34 starts from the disposal of a Section 33 application, not from the receipt of the award.
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 ....
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
