SADGURU INDUSTRIES Vs. TRISHA SPECIALITY CHEMICALS PVT. LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition has been filed assailing the impugned award dtd. 5/10/2021 - 3/12/2021 passed by the Ministry of Micro, Small and Medium Enterprise, Gandhinagar (MSME) in Arbitration Case No. 15 of 2021, whereby the petitioner is directed to pay a sum of Rs.48,18,889.00 to the respondent without following the provisions of the Micro Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 or the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

(2.) Learned advocate Mr. M.B. Gohil, appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the award is required to be quashed and set aside since the petitioner was not given appropriate opportunity to defend its case by the Council constituted under the provisions of the Micro Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (for short, "the Act, 2006"). He has referred to the impugned award and has submitted that in fact, the petitioner was waiting for the Council to intimate the petitioner with regard to the hearing, however, since due to COVID-19 pandemic, initially, the proceedings were held online and they were waiting for the link, however the same was not received by the petitioner.

(3.) In response to the aforesaid submissions, learned advocate Mr. Jamin Dave, appearing for the respondent No. 1 has submitted that the petitioner, in order to avoid the pre-deposit of 75% of the amount, as per the provisions of Sec. 19 of the Act, 2006, which stipulates deposit of 75% of the amount, the present writ petition has been filed. Learned advocate Mr. Dave, has further submitted that the petitioner has an alternative remedy of filing appropriate proceedings under Sec. 34 of the Act, for setting aside the arbitral award, more particularly, reliance is placed on Clause-3 of sub-sec. (a) of Sec. 34. Learned advocate, in support of his submissions has placed reliance on the judgment of the High Court of Madras in case of Romantic garments v. P. Vellaichamy and others, and the order of High Court of Madhya Pradesh (Indore Bench) in the case of Jabalpur Treasure Island Pvt. Ltd., and others v. State of Madhya Pradesh and others, passed in Writ petition No. 369 of 2020, dtd. 30/12/2021. Learned advocate Mr. Dave has further referred to his affidavit-in-reply and the email sent on 23/3/2022 to the petitioner informing that there was an option available to the petitioner to appear through virtual appearance, who is unable to attend the meeting due to lockdown, however on the next emails dtd. 29/7/2021 and 19/10/2021, they were informed that they have to appear in person. Learned advocate Mr. Dave has further submitted that the contention with regard to the different dates in the award is also misconceived. It is submitted that the date of hearing of the Council was kept on 5/10/2021 and on that date, the matter was reserved for order and thereafter, on 15/11/2021, the respondent No. 2 was called upon to provide updated calculation of interest on the outstanding amount since the claimant had submitted interest calculation uptill 28/1/2021, and thereafter, the award was pronounced on 3/12/2021. It is submitted that the respondent No. 2 - Council has passed the award, after conducting the entire proceedings under the provisions of Arbitration Act, after an order was passed on 28/1/2021 by the Council recording failure of conciliation proceedings and relegating the parties through the arbitration proceedings as per Sec. 18(3) of the Act, 2006. Learned advocate Mr. Dave has further placed reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of M/S. Tirupati Steel v. M/S. Shubh Industrial Components, Thus, he has submitted that this writ petition may be dismissed.