M/S Tirupati Build -Con Pvt. Ltd., Vs Rahul Agrawal

¶1

1 / 3

¶2

2025:CGHC:48730

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

REVP No. 295 of 2025

¶6

M/s Tirupati Build -Con Pvt Ltd., & Opposite Railway Station Burhar, P.O. Burhar, District- Sahdol, Madhya Pradesh, Through Its Director Hrshvardhan Singhania

¶7

... Petitioner

¶8

versus

¶9

1 - Rahul Agrawal House No. 37, Friends Colony, Near Dhimrapur Chowk, Raigarh, District- Raigarh (C.G.)

¶10

2 - Chhattisgarh Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council C.G. Directorate of Industries, Chhattisgarh, Udyog Bhawan, Ring Road No. 1, Telibandha, Raipur, (C.G.)

¶11

... Respondents

¶12

For Petitioner	:	Mr. Harsh Wardhan, Advocate
For Respondent No.1	:	Mr. Sunil Sahu, Advocate
For Respondent No.2/State	:	Mr. Ajit Singh, GA

¶13

(Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma)

¶14

Order on Board

¶15

23/09/2025

¶16

Digitally signed byASHUTOSH ASHUTOSH MISHRA MISHRA Date: 2025.10.06 10:57:39 +0530

¶17

The instant review petition has been filed seeking review of the order dated 29/07/2025 passed by this Court in WPC No.432/2025 whereby the writ petition filed by the petitioner has been dismissed on the ground of availability of alternative remedy.

¶18

2 / 3

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the impugned order has been passed without giving any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner before passing the impugned ex-parte award passed by the learned MSME Council, furthermore, the said award has been passed contrary to the provisions of of the MSME Act, therefore, it is prayed that the order of the dismissal of the writ petition dated 29/07/2025 in WPC No.432/2025 may kindly be restored.

¶20

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents oppose the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and would submit that the instant review petition may be dismissed.

¶21

I have learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents.

¶22

This Court in WPC No.432 of 2025 on 29/07/2025 has passed the following order:-

¶23

With the consent of the parties, the matter is heard finally.

¶24

Challenge in the present petition is to the order impugned dated 29.12.2023 whereby the MSME Facilitation Council, Raipur has passed an exparte award against the petitioner.

¶25

Counsel for the State submits that the petitioner has an alternative remedy available under the MSME Act and therefore writ petition is not maintainable.

¶26

4. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed as not maintainable. However, the petitioner is at liberty to pursue the alternative remedy available to him under the law.

¶27

Since the alternative remedy is available to the petitioner, therefore,

¶28

3 / 3

¶29

the said writ petition i.e. WPC No.432 of 2025 was dismissed. It appears that the petitioner by presentation of this review petition seeks an opportunity to argue the entire case afresh on merits under the garb of the review petition, which is not permissible and tenable in law.

¶30

It is trite law that under the garb of review petition, the petitioner should not be permitted to argue the entire case afresh, which would amount to convert the review petition into an appeal and the same is not sustainable in law. { See: Meera Bhanjan v. Smt. Nirmal Kumar

¶31

Chowdhary, AIR 1995 SC 455, Lily Thomas etc. v. Union of India and others, AIR 2000 SC 1650, Ajit Kumar Rath v. State of Orissa and others, AIR 2000 SC 85, Government of T.N. & Others v. M. Ananchu Asari and others, (2005) 2 SCC 332, and Kerla State Electricity Board v. Hitech Electrothermicsm & Hydropower Ltd. and others, (2005) 6 SCC 651} .

¶32

As a sequel, the review petition, sans substratum is liable to be and is hereby dismissed.

SD/-

SD/-

(Arvind Kumar Verma)

JUDGE

ashu

M/S Tirupati Build -Con Pvt. Ltd., v. Rahul Agrawal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Tirupati Build -Con Pvt. Ltd., v. Rahul Agrawal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramvichar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Upendra Kumar Chawda Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Pankaj Kumar Agrawal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Sushila Dwivedi Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Reserve Bank of India Vs Pawan Netam

Deepak Dang Vs Indial Oil Corporation Limited