C.O. 3853 of 2016. Case: Union of India Vs H.M.R. Construction Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.. High Court of Calcutta (India)
| Case Number | C.O. 3853 of 2016 |
| Counsel | For Appellant: A. Banerjee, Adv. and For Respondents: Mohit Gupta, Adv. |
| Judges | Shivakant Prasad, J. |
| Issue | Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Sections 11, 34, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 7; Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) - Section 151; Interest On Delayed Payments to Small Scale and Ancillary Industrial Undertakings Act, 1993 - Section 7; Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 - ... |
| Judgement Date | April 12, 2017 |
| Court | High Court of Calcutta (India) |
Judgment:
Shivakant Prasad, J.
-
Orders dated 19.4.2016 and 11.9.2014 passed in Misc. case No. 82 of 2009 by the learned Additional District Judge, 2nd Court, Barasat challenging the purported award dated 02.3.2009 passed by the learned Arbitrator Mr. S.C. Padhi is under challenge by the petitioner.
-
Brief facts leading to this case is that the petitioner filed an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for setting aside the award published by the learned Arbitrator which was registered as Misc. case in which the opposite party filed an application dated 21.6.2014 for directions upon the petitioner to deposit 75% of the awarded amount which was allowed by order dated 11.9.2014.
-
Moot question which falls for consideration is whether provisions of Delayed Payment and Small Scale and Ancillary Undertaking Act, 1993 Act and the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 apply in an application for setting aside the award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
-
The opposite party is undoubtedly a small scale unit within the meaning of Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that application under Section 34 was filed prior to coming into force of the amendment which came in to effect in the month of October, 2015 and that the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Act, 2006 does not apply in the present case and when the award is under challenge.
-
Learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that reference to the arbitrator was made on 10.8.2006 and award was published on 23.12.2008.
-
The moot question before this Court for decision as to whether the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 would apply in the given case of the petitioner. The said Act come into force with effect from 02.10.2006. The arbitrator entered upon reference on 10.8.2006 that is to say, prior to the said Act, 2006 coming into effect. My attention is invited to the provision of Section 18 relating to reference to Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council and the provision of Section 19 relating to application for setting aside decree, award or order of the said Act. The said provisions may be reproduced hereunder for profitable consideration as to whether the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 would be applicable in the instant case as admittedly the arbitrator had entered reference on 10.8.2006 prior to the said Act coming into effect.
18. Reference to Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council.--
(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, any party to a dispute may, with regard to any amount due under section 17, make a reference to the Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council.
(2) On receipt of a reference under sub-section (1), the Council shall either itself conduct conciliation in the matter or seek the assistance of any institution or centre providing alternate dispute resolution services by making a reference to such an institution or centre, for conducting conciliation and the provisions of sections 65 to 81 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (26 of 1996) shall apply to such a dispute as if the conciliation was initiated under Part III of that Act.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial