Dismissed

S. Lalitha v. the Managing Director

Karnataka HC5 Aug 2019WA/2552/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed multiple writ appeals filed under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act, 2019. The court upheld the Single Judge's view that the appropriate remedy for challenging an arbitral award under the Minor, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 is under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, not through writ petitions.

What did the court decide?

The writ appeals were dismissed as the appellants were directed to adopt the appropriate remedy under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

S. Lalitha Vs the Managing Director — Company and Corporate | Karnataka HC (2019)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2019

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON’BLE MR.ABHAY S. OKA, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶5

AND

¶6

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

¶7

WRIT APPEAL NOS.2550/2019, 2551/2019, 2552/2019, 2553/2019, 2554/2019 AND 2555/2019 (GM-RES)

¶8

IN W.A.NO.2550/2019

¶9

BETWEEN

¶10

N.R. BHADRACHALAM AGED 58 YEARS S/O LATE RAJAPPA PROPRIETOR M/S QUALITY UTILITY ARTICLES NO.3362, 13^TH CROSS, 2^ND MAIN ROAD SHASTRINAGAR, NEW K.R. ROAD BANASHANKARI 2^ND STAGE BANGALORE-560028

¶11

... APPELLANT

¶12

(BY SRI M. ARUN PONAPPA, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND

¶14

THE MANAGING DIRECTOR M/S KARNATAKA LEATHER INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., (LIDKAR) OBLAONG BLOCK, 2^ND FLOOR NO.17/5, UNITY BUILDING J.C. ROAD, BANGALORE-560002

¶15

THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERMENT INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE DEPARTMENT VIKAS SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560001

¶16

THE KARNATAKA MICRO AND SMALL ENTERPRISES FACILITATION COUNCIL OF

¶17

¶18

KARNATAKA, (CHAIRMAN) 2^ND FLOOR, SOUTH BLOCK KHANIJA BHAVAN NO.47, RACE COURSE ROAD BANGALORE-560001

¶19

... RESPONDENTS

¶20

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 05/09/2018 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE SINGLE JUDGE IN W.P.NO.5369/2011 AND ALLOW THE WRIT APEPAL & ETC.

¶21

IN W.A.NO.2551/2019

¶22

BETWEEN

¶23

K.S. MADAN GOPAL AGED 68 YEARS S/O LATE K.R.SRINIVASA SHETTY PROPRIETOR M/S ANANTH LEATHER WORKS NO.171, 6^TH CROSS, TEACHERS COLONY BANASHANKAR 2^ND STAGE BANGALORE - 560 070.

¶24

... APPELLANT

¶25

(BY SRI M. ARUN PONAPPA, ADVOCATE)

¶26

AND

¶27

THE MANAGING DIRECTOR M/S KARNATAKA LEATHER INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,(LIDKAR) 2^ND FLOOR, OBLONG BLOCK NO.17/5, UNITY BUILDING J.C.ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 002

¶28

THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE DEPARTMENT VIKAS SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560 001.

¶29

THE KARNATAKA MICRO AND SMALL ENTERPRISES FACILIATATION COUNCIL OF KARNATAKA (CHAIRMAN) 2^ND FLOOR, SOUTH BLOCK KHANIJA BHAVAN

¶30

¶31

NO.47, RACE COURSE ROAD BANGALORE - 560 001.

¶32

... RESPONDENTS

¶33

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 05/09/2018 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE SINGLE JUDGE, IN W.P.NO.5375/2011 AND ALLOW THE WRIT APPEAL & ETC.

¶34

IN W.A.NO.2552/2019

¶35

BETWEEN

¶36

S. LALITHA AGED 53 YEARS W/O N.R. BHADRACHALAM PROPRIETRIX M/S INDIAN LEATHER INDUSTRIES NO.3362, 13^TH CROSS, 2^ND MAIN ROAD, SHASTRINAGAR, NEW K.R.ROAD, BANASHANKARI 2^ND STAGE BANGALORE - 560 028.

¶37

... APPELLANT

¶38

(BY SRI M. ARUN PONAPPA, ADVOCATE)

¶39

AND

¶40

THE MANAGING DIRECTOR M/S KARNATAKA LEATHER INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., (LIDKAR) 2^ND FLOOR, OBLONG BLOCK NO.17/5, UNITY BUILDING J.C.ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 002.

¶41

THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNEMTN INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE DEPARTMENT VIKAS SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560 001.

¶42

THE KARNATAKA MICRO AND SMALL ENTERPRISES FACILITATION COUNCIL OF KARNATAKA (CHAIRMAN) 2^ND FLOOR, SOUTH BLOCK KHANIJA BHAVAN NO.47, RACE COURSE ROAD BANGALORE - 560 001

... RESPONDENTS

IN W.A.NO.2553/2019

¶47

BETWEEN

¶48

S. KUMAR AGED 57 YEARS S/O LATE SUBBA BHATTA PROPRIETOR BANGALORE LEATHER CREATIONS SOMANAHALLI VILLAGE KANAKAPURA ROAD UTTARAHALLI HOBLI BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK BANGALORE-560082 ... APPELLANT (BY SRI M. ARUN PONAPPA, ADVOCATE)

¶49

AND

¶50

THE MANAGING DIRECTOR M/S KARNATAKA LEATHER INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., (LIDKAR) 2^ND FLOOR, NO.17/5, OBLONG BLOCK UNITY BUILDING, J.C.ROAD BANGALORE-560002

¶51

THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE DEPARTMENT VIKAS SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560001

¶52

THE KARNATAKA MICRO AND SMALL ENTEREPRISES FACILITATION COUNCIL OF KARNATAKA, (CHAIRMAN) 2^ND FLOOR,SOUTH BLOCK KHANIJA BHAVAN NO.47, RACE COURSE ROAD BANGALORE-560001

¶53

... RESPONDENTS

¶54

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE

¶55

¶56

THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 05/09/2018 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE SINGLE JUDGE IN W.P.NO.5371/2011 AND ALLOW THE WRIT APPEAL & ETC.

¶57

IN W.A. NO.2554/2019

¶58

BETWEEN

¶59

VIJAYALAKSHMI AGED 59 YEARS W/O S. NAGARAJ PROPRIETRIX M/S SHWETHA ENGERPRISES NO.440/25, 17^TH MAIN ROAD BANASHANKARI 1^ST STAGE BANGALORE-560050

¶60

... APPELLANT

¶61

(BY SRI M. ARUN PONAPPA, ADVOCATE)

¶62

AND

¶63

THE MANAGING DIRECTOR M/S KARNATAKA LEATHER INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., (LIDKAR) NO.17/5, OBLONG BLOCK, 2^ND FLOOR, UNITY BUILDING J.C. ROAD, BANGALORE-560002

¶64

THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERMENT INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE DEPARTMENT VIKAS SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560001

¶65

THE KARNATAKA MICRO AND SMALL ENTERPRISES FACILITATION COUNCIL OF KARNATAKA, (CHAIRMAN) 2^ND FLOOR, SOUTH BLOCK KHANIJA BHAVAN NO.47, RACE COURSE ROAD BANGALORE-560001

... RESPONDENTS

IN W.A.NO.2555/2019

¶70

BETWEEN

¶71

N.R. RAMESH AGED 66 YEARS S/O LATE RAJAPPA PROPRIETOR M/S SRI MANJUNATHA LEATHER INDUSTRIES 4TH FLOOR, NO.10/3, 3-8, 3RD MAIN ROAD, 6TH CROSS, VENKATAPURA LAYOUT, BANGALORE-560034

¶72

... APPELLANT

¶73

(BY SRI M. ARUN PONAPPA, ADVOCATE)

¶74

AND

¶75

THE MANAGING DIRECTOR M/S KARNATAKA LEATHER INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., (LIDKAR) 2^ND FLOOR, NO.17/5, OBLONG BLOCK UNITY BUILDING, J.C.ROAD BANGALORE-560002

¶76

THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE DEPARTMENT VIKAS SOUDHA, BANGALORE- 560001

¶77

THE KARNATAKA MICRO AND SMALL ENTEREPRISES FACILITATION COUNCIL OF KARNATAKA, (CHAIRMAN) 2^ND FLOOR, SOUTH BLOCK, KHANIJA BHAVAN, RACE COURSE ROAD, BANGALORE-560001

¶78

... RESPONDENTS

¶79

¶80

THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, CHIEF JUSTICE DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶81

¶82

JUDGMENT

¶83

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants.

¶84

The appellants had taken recourse to the remedy under

¶85

Section 18 of the Minor, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (for short ‘the said Act of 2006’). The awards were made and it was held that the first respondent was not liable to pay any amount to the appellants. The awards were subjected to a challenge before the learned Single Judge by filing the writ petitions. The awards were made in the year 2009-2010. The writ petitions were filed in the year 2011.

¶86

The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petitions filed by the appellants by observing that while passing the awards, the Karnataka Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council, after examining the evidence on record, came to the conclusion that nothing is due and payable to the appellants. The claim before the learned Single Judge by the appellants was for payment of amounts allegedly due and payable by the first respondent to the appellants together with interest for the delayed payment.

¶87

¶88

The learned Single Judge referred to the awards made and held that the Council has already recorded a finding on the issue of liability of the first respondent and if the appellants were aggrieved by the awards made by the Council, the remedy was under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 read with sub-Section (3) of Section 18 of the said Act of 2006.

¶89

The learned counsel appearing for the appellants submitted that it is a case of injustice to the appellants who are small enterprises. His submission is that the appellants were not properly advised and therefore, instead of adopting the remedy as aforesaid, the appellants were advised to file the writ petitions.

¶90

After having considered the submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the appellants, we find no error in the view taken by the learned Single Judge when he held that the remedy of the appellants was under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 in view of sub-section (3) of Section 18 of the said Act of 2006.

¶91

The learned Single Judge has specifically kept the remedy open while dismissing the writ petitions.

¶92

¶93

Accordingly, there is no merit in the appeals and the same are dismissed. If in law, the appellants are entitled to the benefit of exclusion of time spent in prosecuting the writ petitions and these appeals, the appellants are entitled to urge the same while adopting the appropriate remedy in accordance with law.

¶94

Sd/CHIEF JUSTICE

¶95

Sd/JUDGE

¶96

AHB

S. Lalitha v. the Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S. Lalitha v. the Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vijayam Bharani Trust Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Sri.Lakshminarayana Vs the State of Karnataka

M/S Billiton Mine Wings & PWD Contractor Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Santhosh Menezes Vs the State Government

Sri. K B Somashekhar Vs the Managing Director

Vijayalakshmi Vs the Managing Director